Category: Critical thinking

For this assignment I need to watch a video and answer a couple of questions along with a paragraph with a minumum of 4 sentences about the questions that need to be answered. Attached is the rubric, the template that houses the questions that need to be answered and below is the video that needs to be watched to answer the following questions. Thank you in advance. If you need anymore information feel free to ask.

Can I Have a Word?
A “stipulative word or phrase” is a declaration of a meaning that is intended to be attached by the speaker to a word, expression, or symbol and usually does not already have an established use in the sense intended. Stipulative definitions often get started as jargon or slang and are initially limited to a particular group of people. Young people may create new terminology such as “beer goggles” and “hooking up” as a way of distancing themselves from previous generations.
Initial post 300 words or more. Peer Post minimum of 100 words for each post. Step 1: Contribute three stipulative words that are currently trending. Please discuss with the class what these words tell us about our society and how it is evolving. Discuss how understanding these changes can help us be better communicators and critical thinkers.

Social Media does more harm than good.
Discussions are focused on building and analyzing arguments. Here are the guidelines
for discussion posts. Discussions rely on using the Toolkit, so you should have that in
front of you as you read this and as you do your posts.
This is an exercise in building arguments so your posts do not have to reflect your own
beliefs. It is an important practice to try to articulate views you do not necessarily agree
with so that you can evaluate the best arguments against what you believe more fairly.
As always, be specific and clarify any terms that are open to interpretation.
Everything you post must be entirely in your own words. Any work that is taken
from another source (online, another student, etc.) will automatically receive a zero,
without a possibility of making it up. (I definitely check for plagiarism beyond what
Turnitin flags, so I strongly encourage you to do all of your own work in this class.)
Avoid emotive language and fallacies (we’ll be learning about these throughout the
semester).
Each week I will post a general proposition (claim). To get full credit for each week’s
discussion you need to do the following:
1) Give a specific Pro conclusion related to that general proposition that focuses on a
particular aspect of the proposition. And, 2) give a specific Con conclusion related to
that general proposition that focuses on a particular aspect of the proposition.
Then for each specific conclusion (1 Pro & 1 Con) you need to also give a well-thought
out Reason in the form of full statements. Each of these Reasons needs to be backed up
by some Example/Evidence you can think of off the top of your head (no internet
sources allowed – this is all your own thinking and writing). Finally, assess the extent to
which the claim is True (T) (Always, Sometimes, Never) and explain why.
For example, if the general proposition was: “The Wire is the best TV show ever made,”
a more specific pro conclusion would be: “The Wire is the best TV show because it is so
true to the real world circumstances it portrays.” A reason that would support that would
be: “The Wire is so accurate because it was written by people who worked in journalism,
public education, and law enforcement in the Baltimore area where it was set.” The
evidence would be citing the credentials of the shows creators, David Simon, who was a
reporter for The Baltimore Sun, and Ed Burns, who was a homicide detective for many
years before becoming a public school teacher, both in Baltimore. I would assess this
claim is likely True for all people who share my criteria for evaluating TV Shows (one
of which is authenticity and relevance to the world as it is).
The first half of your discussion contributions should then look as follows:
Specific Pro conclusion (W): …..
Reason (R): …..
Example/Evidence (E) ….
Truth evaluation (T) ….
Specific Con conclusion (W): …..
Reason (R): …..
Example/Evidence (E) ….
Truth evaluation (T) ….

Touchstone 4: Contrasting Normative Arguments in Standard Form
Scenario: In this assignment, you will make two contrasting normative arguments about what one ought to do. Both arguments will be about the same topic; thus, at least one of the arguments will contradict your personal opinion. You will compose the arguments in standard form, as a series of statements that end with your conclusion. Do not write your arguments as an essay.
Assignment: Download the submission template below, which further breaks down the steps involved in this assignment. You will return the completed template as your Touchstone submission.
Critical Thinking Touchstone 4 Template.docx
In order to foster learning and growth, all essays you submit must be newly written specifically for this course. Any plagiarized or recycled work will result in a Plagiarism Detected alert. Review this tutorial for more about plagiarism and the Plagiarism Detected alert: Touchstones: Academic Integrity Guidelines. For guidance on the use of generative AI technology, review Ethical Standards and Appropriate Use of AI.
A. Directions
Step 1: Choose a Topic
Choose one topic from the following list:
Should people eat meat?
Should marijuana be legal?
Should pet cats be kept indoors?
Should zoos exist?
Should customers leave a tip in a coffee shop?
Should seat belt wearing be mandatory?
Should children be required to take gym/physical education?
Should public roads be used for private car parking?
Step 2. Develop Logically Contradictory Normative Conclusions
Develop two logically contradictory normative conclusions on this topic. You do not need to agree with both (or either!) conclusions, but you should be able to logically support both of them.
The conclusions need not be phrased exactly the same as they are phrased in the topic list, but they do need to be logically contradictory to one another.
EXAMPLE
If you selected the topic “Should people eat meat?”, your conclusions might be:
People should not eat meat.
People should eat meat.
But it would also be acceptable to choose:
People should reduce their meat consumption.
People need not reduce their meat consumption.
Another option could be:
It is morally permissible to eat fish.
It is not morally permissible to eat fish.
Note that you need not indicate which conclusion you actually agree with. An omnivore might write an excellent logical argument for veganism, or vice versa!
Step 3: Write Normative Argument for First Conclusion
Choose your first conclusion and write a normative argument in standard form to reach that conclusion. This requires knowledge of the standard form of logical arguments, which you can find in 2.1.1 What Is an Argument?, and understanding of normative arguments, which you can find in 2.1.2 Identifying Arguments and Statements. Because normative arguments rely on standards of human behavior, you should also review 4.3.3 Moral Frameworks. The directions in the template will give you further instructions.
Step 4: Write Normative Argument for Second Conclusion
Repeat Step 3 for your second conclusion.
Here is an example of two arguments with normative conclusions taking contrary points of view. The normative premises are marked with an asterisk. This serves as an example of what arguments look like in standard form. This topic may not be used for your own Touchstone.
Americans are granted the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as a foundational principle of its founding documents.
Among these rights are bodily autonomy and personal decisions about family planning.*
Forcing a parent to go through an unwanted pregnancy and childbirth violates these principles by taking away their basic right to liberty and long-term pursuit of happiness.*
Forcing a parent to go through an unwanted pregnancy and childbirth also frequently presents a threat to the life of the birth parent.
There is no constitutional or scientific reason to confer personhood on a fetus.
Any opinion on the personhood of fetuses is thus not based on law or science, but a personal moral or religious choice.
The Constitution (Amendment 1) establishes the freedom of religion.
Therefore, any law derived from a religious stance is unconstitutional (from 5-7).
Therefore, pregnant people have the right to terminate a pregnancy for any reason (from 1-4, 8).
It is wrong to kill a human being without justification such as self-defense.*
An unplanned pregnancy may be inconvenient, but only in rare cases does it present a threat to a person’s life.
In no other cases besides abortion do we make it legal to murder people who inconvenience us.
Born children are also inconvenient, but it is not legal for parents to kill them.
In no other cases besides abortion do we make it legal to murder the born children of rape or incest.
A fetus is a viable human being at 24 weeks.
Therefore, except in cases where the pregnancy presents a threat to the birth parent’s life, abortion should be illegal after 24 weeks.
Step 5: Reflection
Answer the reflection questions about your reasoning behind the arguments you wrote. One question asks to identify a deductive rule of inference or an inductive practice used in your arguments. You can find these in 3.3.2 Valid Rules of Inference From Conditional Statements, 3.3.3 Valid Rules of Inference From Conjunction and Disjunction, and the 4.1.4 Inference to the Best Explanation, or other inductive practices discussed throughout unit 4.
Refer to the checklist below throughout the Touchstone process. Do not submit your Touchstone until it meets these guidelines.
1. Argument Preparation
❒ Is each argument in standard form, not paragraph form?
❒ Do your two arguments have logically contradictory conclusions?
❒ Is each argument at least five declarative sentences, ending in a conclusion?
❒ Does each argument have a normative conclusion (saying what people ought to do)?
❒ Is there at least one normative premise that supports each conclusion?
2. Annotating Your Argument
❒ Did you place an asterisk (*) on the normative premise(s) that support your conclusion?
❒ Did you underline any subconclusions in your argument?
❒ Are there sources for any assertions that are fact-based and not well known/accepted?
3. Reflection Questions
❒ Did you answer all five of the reflection questions satisfactorily?
❒ Do your answers meet the length requirement and fully answer the question?
B. Rubric
Advanced Proficient Acceptable Needs Improvement Non-Performance
Logical Arguments: Form
Response shows understanding of logical arguments. (20%)
Both arguments meet all requirements of proficiency, with notably clear writing and careful sequencing of statements. Both arguments have the minimum number (5) of statements. All statements are declarative (make an assertion), and final sentences are normative conclusions. One or both arguments fall short of goal by 1-2 sentences, or 1-2 sentences do not make declarative statements, or final sentence is not a normative conclusion. One or both arguments fall short of goal by 3 or more sentences, or 3 or more sentences do not make declarative statements, or final sentence is not a normative conclusion. Argument is not in standard form, or argument falls so short of goal that no credit can be given, or only one argument is provided.
Logical Arguments: Strength/Validity
Response shows understanding of premises supporting a conclusion. (20%)
Both arguments meet all the requirements of proficiency, with a notably convincing or sound argument. Both arguments have premises that show the conclusion is true or probable and have at least one normative premise to support the conclusion. One or both arguments include 1-2 premises which do not support the conclusion and/or there is no normative statement to support the conclusion. One or both arguments include 3 or more premises which do not support the conclusion and/or there is no normative statement to support the conclusion. One or both arguments are absent, in essay form, or are so poorly formed that no credit can be given.
Logical Arguments: Analysis
Correctly identifies and describes components of a logical argument. Support for premises is included. (10%)
Both arguments meet criteria for proficiency, with a well-formed subargument that is itself valid/strong and provides compelling support to the conclusion. Both arguments identify the normative statement(s) that support the conclusion, correctly identify any subconclusions in the argument, and include references to support factual assertions that are not well known and widely accepted. Both arguments each include 2 of the 3 requirements: identifying normative statements in premises, identifying subconclusions, and providing support for factual assertions that are not well known/accepted. Both arguments each include 1 of 3 requirements: identifying normative statements in premises, identifying subconclusions, and providing support for factual assertions that are not well known/accepted. Components of argument are not identified as described in the instructions and no support is given for assertions. No credit can be given.
Reflection – Key Concepts
Answers reflection questions thoroughly and thoughtfully. (25%)
Demonstrates deep understanding of key concepts in the class with accurate and insightful responses to questions, using the appropriate vocabulary from the tutorials. Supports each answer with specifics where needed. Meets or exceeds recommended length guidelines. Demonstrates good understanding of key concepts in the class with accurate responses to questions, using appropriate vocabulary from the tutorials. Supports each answer with specifics where needed. Meets or exceeds recommended length guidelines. Demonstrates some understanding of key concepts in the class but may lack specifics or detail, and some answers may be inaccurate or insubstantial, or makes only occasional or inappropriate use of the vocabulary from the tutorials. Meets recommended length guidelines. Demonstrates a flawed understanding of key concepts, or answers are so insubstantial that understanding of the concepts cannot be appropriately assessed. No answers to the questions are present or so little effort is evident that no credit can be given.
Reflection – Critical Thinking
Answers to questions demonstrate good habits of critical thinking. (15%)
Demonstrates thoughtful reflection; includes insights, observations, and/or examples in all responses, following or exceeding response length guidelines. Demonstrates thoughtful reflection; includes occasional insights, observations, and/or examples, following response length guidelines. Primarily demonstrates thoughtful reflection, but some responses are lacking in detail or insight; primarily follows response length guidelines. Shows limited reflection; the majority of responses are lacking in detail or insight, with some questions left unanswered or falling short of response length guidelines. No answers to the questions are present or so little effort is evident that no credit can be given.
Conventions
Submission follows conventions for standard written English and meets requirements. (10%)
There are almost no errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and capitalization; all length and formatting requirements are met. There are minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and capitalization that do not impede readability; length and formatting requirements are nearly met. There are frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and capitalization that somewhat impede readability; length and formatting requirements are nearly met. There are consistent errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and capitalization that significantly impede readability; length and formatting requirements are not met. Submission does not meet the minimum threshold for points to be awarded.

Assignment objective: Students will create a paper involving the development and analysis of an argument that seeks to solve a real-world problem.
Length: Your submission should be at least two pages in length, not counting the title page and references (if used).
References: No outside sources are required for the assignment.
Details: This assignment has two parts. Both parts will be completed in the same attached Unit VII Homework Template.
Part 1: Choose one of the three topics from the table below. Write an argument with a clear conclusion (thesis) that you have created about this topic. Your conclusion must be a straightforward one-sentence assertion. Note that your thesis or conclusion can be something narrow within each topic. For example, “I should stop smoking” is a thesis or conclusion that falls under the topic of being healthy.
Incorporate the following guidelines as you write:
Briefly introduce the issue or topic.
Identify at least two premises for your conclusion.
Write at least one page for your argument and written response.
Your written response should include inductive (an observation arriving at a theory) aspects of your argument as well as deductive (a theory that arrives at a conclusion) aspects.
List at least one fallacy that you may have committed but have avoided.
Write at least one unstated assumption that is logically part of your argument.
If your argument turns out to have a sub-argument (see Unit VII Lesson), make sure you fill out a template for each argument. Follow the writing guidelines on pages 273 through 275 of Chapter 12 of our textbook.
Possible Topics
Questions that may help in coming up with a thesis (conclusion):
Money management
How should I manage my money? What spending habits can I change? How can I save more?
Study habits
What is the best way to study? What can I do on a daily basis to study? What can I do on a weekly basis?
Being healthy
What can I do to be healthy? What daily habits can I change?
Part 2: After writing your argument paragraphs, fill out the conclusion, premises, inductive aspects, and deductive aspects in the chart at the bottom of the template. In the second chart, include your potential fallacies and hidden assumptions.
View the Unit VII Sample Homework for an example of how your completed assignment should look. The first part of your completed assignment must be at least one page in length. No outside resources are required. APA Style is not required for this assignment. 
Attached are sample and template 

I need a five paragraph persuasive essay written on why the US should implement universal healthcare. Cost and accessibility, all peoples of any financial standing can get help, and less sickness being spread should be the three points. 

1-Essay: First, find an article online which presents a deductive argument (the source doesn’t matter; what matters is that you find an argument). Cite the article with a link. Explain the argument and why it is deductive. Be sure to read the unit reading before you start this assignment. 
please make sure to link the article you used to present a deductive argument 

1-Essay: First, find an article online which presents a deductive argument (the source doesn’t matter; what matters is that you find an argument). Cite the article with a link. Explain the argument and why it is deductive. Be sure to read the unit reading before you start this assignment.

1. Rationale and guiding research questions: Explain your reasons for doing this. Based on discussion with other classmates, their work, or your communications with me, you should by now have a clear idea of what this entails. Speak your voice! 
2. Setting, participants, methodology: simply, expand on what you listed in your outline.
3. Your initial findings, if any. 
I already have the outline done, which is the the document linked.
Thank you.

Note: please complete all four sections below and label all sections with the numbers and letters listed below.
(1) In some detail explain the scientific method and all of its steps as presented by the textbook.
(2) Consider the readings from Chapter 11 of the textbook The Power of Critical Thinking 7th edition by Lewis Vaughn on “The Scientific Method” and “Testing Scientific Theories.”  Develop a hypothesis related to the efficacy of a Covid-19 vaccine (your company calls it “coRid-23”) and use hypothesis testing to develop your own scientific, clinical trial.  Be sure your experiment will provide the most conclusive results possible.  As such, as part of the clinical trial, be sure to explain and incorporate all of the following ideas: (a) the experimental group, (b) the control group, (c) placebo, (d) double-blind study, and (e) replicated study.  In addition to applying each of these ideas to your own study, you must also explain them in a few sentences.
(3) Find an online website or internet article discussing one of the recent scientific studies related to a Covid-19 vaccine study (e.g. Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca, etc.).  The article must come from a reputable news source (choose between: NYT, BBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, or FOX only).  Include a link to the news article you chose.  Briefly summarize the details of the vaccine study/trial.
(4) Then, compare your chosen news article from (3) above to your own proposed study of coRid-23 in part (2).  Then answer two (and only two) of the following questions: (a) How are the two studies similar?  (b) What are some specific differences between the two studies? (c) If the goal is to have a vaccine that works on all people, how might the study or studies be improved?  (d) What concerns do you have with either of the two studies? (e) How might you compare the two vaccines to determine which of the two is better/more effective? [Remember to label with the letters all parts above.]