345-HUP-FD_assign2A

Assignment 2A                                                                                        (10%)

Description

Where Module 1 introduced you to the practice of doing ethics, Module 2 introduces you to an important skill that is required for applying ethical theories: critical thinking. After working through all the course materials in Module 2, you now have a good idea of what “critical thinking” entails. It involves thinking rationally and detecting failures in argumentation. Critical thinking is a kind of “intellectual self-defence” that may help you avoid arguments and conclusions that are faulty or morally wrong.

Scenario

You are now in the professor’s office for a second meeting. As it happens, the professor is impressed with your work.

The professor shares an observation with you: “I really appreciate how you think.” It turns out this is a segue into the next task! “I need you to do a basic analysis of an ethical argument taken from the media. My other assistants and I will use your basic analysis as data for our research work.” While you might be unsure, the professor’s confidence in you means a lot. So you agree and ask to know more.

First, you are to find and state the article’s conclusion. Second, the professor wants you to locate and state the article’s premises that support the conclusion. As the Textbook states, this helps show what is logically relevant to the article’s argument. Finally, the professor wants you to identify any fallacies in the argument. You need to do this and explain which fallacy is at work.

Your Task

You are provided with an article on a current ethical issue called “Real Motivation for Diabetes Prevention.”

You will analyze the article’s argument by identifying the components of moral argumentation and its informal fallacies.

Instructions for Completion

Open the Assignment 2A Answer Shell document, where you will find your article as well as space to write your answer.

  1. Read the article through from beginning to end to get a sense of its moral argument.
  2. Reread the article. This time, identify the conclusion and the premises:
  3. Put the article’s conclusion statement in bold-face
  4. Underline three premises in the article.
  5. To verify your work, ask yourself “Does each premise relate to the conclusion?” There are two reasons why this might not be the case:
  • You did not correctly identify the conclusion.
  • You did not correctly identify the premises.
  1. Write out the premises you identified in the previous step, under the heading Argument Premises.
  2. Place the conclusion you identified below the premises.
  3. Fill in the Argument Fallacy Table with five fallacies from the article.
  4. Double-check your work and make any necessary corrections before submitting it for grading.

Don't hesitate - Save time and Excel

Assignmentsden brings you the best in custom paper writing! To get started, simply place an order and provide the details!

Post Homework
Top