In this assignment, you will identify and explore your intuitive critical-thinking strategies. It is the starting point to developing the skills to analyze information critically.
Research methods of identifying strong and weak arguments using your textbook and the Argosy University online library resources. Be sure to cover the following:
- Identify premises and conclusions
- Discuss whether or not an inference is warranted
- Determine whether arguments utilize inductive or deductive reasoning
For this assignment, your facilitator will assign you one of the following debates:
- Debate 1: Should the Ashley X treatments have been permitted?
- Debate 2: Is Osama Bin Ladens death a decisive blow to Al Qaeda or an unmitigated victory against terrorism?
Each debate has two sets of articles for review. Your facilitator will assign you one of these sets.
Each set has two articles with two varying, but important, perspectives on the same subject. Be sure to read both articles in the set.
Debate 1:
These pairs of articles focus on the subject of Ashley X, a child with static encephalopathy who underwent radical surgical procedures to facilitate her care and, thereby, ostensibly improve her quality of life.
Set A
- Lewis, J. (2007, January 6). The moral line in medicine shifts once again. The Independent, p. 37. (ProQuest Document ID 311096455).
- Singer, P. (2007, January 26). A convenient truth [Op-Ed]. The New York Times, p. A.21. (ProQuest Document ID: 433487228).
Set B
- Lindemann, H., & Nelson, J. L. (2008). The romance of the family. The Hastings Center Report, 38(4), 1921. (ProQuest Document ID 222368438).
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.edmc.edu/docview/222368438?accountid=34899
- Picard, A. (2007, January 11). Its wrong to keep disabled girl as an angel.The Globe and Mail, p. A.17. (ProQuest Document ID 383481551).
Debate 2
These pairs of articles focus on the subject of Osama Bin Ladens death and the alleged implications his death are expected to have on matters of future Al Qaeda activity and international safety.
Set A
- Clarke, R. A. (2011, May 3). Bin Ladens dead. Al Qaedas not [Op-Ed]. The New York Times, p. A.23. (ProQuest Document ID 864311946).
- Soufan, A. H. (2011, May 3). The end of the Jihadist dream [Op-Ed]. The New York Times, p. A.23. (ProQuest Document ID 864311556). Retrieved from http://www.thecampuscommon.com/library/ezproxy/ticketdemocs.asp?sch=auo&turl=http://search.proquest.com/docview/864311556
Set B
- Clarke, R. A. (2011, May 3). Bin Ladens dead. Al Qaedas not [Op-Ed]. The New York Times, p. A.23. (ProQuest Document ID 864311946).
- Nocera, J. (2011, May 3). 4 questions he leaves behind [Op-Ed]. The New York Times, p. A.23. (ProQuest Document ID 864311864).
Respond to the following:
- Identify and explain the strongest argument in each article.
Or
- Identify and explain the weakest argument in each article.
Give reasons and examples from your research in support of your response.
Your initial response should be about 300400 words in length, with at least one reference cited in APA format. Be sure to reply to at least two of your classmates using at least 75 words per response.
