Chat with us, powered by LiveChat PHIL 210 – The Critical Thinking | acewriters
+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

PHIL 210 — Critical ThinkingMaximum grade: 100Instructions:Answer the questions below. Each Essay Question is worth the number of points indicated.As this is an open book “take home” test, your answer should be well researched and reveal the use of the textbook, notes, online lectures and discussions as well as other sources, and yet display the originality of your own hard work.Secondary sources should be cited correctly, for example in accordance with the MLA Manual of Style.Your writing must be strictly and entirely your own. You are expected to form your own answers. Any secondary sources consulted must be cited. Any quotations you use must be clearly indicated.4. Passages from the text can be cited by using only the text name and standard pagination. For example (Morrow & Weston, 2011: 47). Quote only when necessary.5. Quotes from the Lectures notes should state the Week and Lecture part. For example (Week 2, Lecture 3)Question #1 (20 points total)Part 1 (15 points) Based on an actual event on a Thursday (early afternoon) in February.While walking from my car to a beach on the Florida West Coast, I noticed something interesting about the car license plates in the parking lot. Four were from NY, 3 from Michigan, and one each from Maine, Minnesota, Virginia, Texas, New Brunswick, and New Mexico. Meanwhile I saw only ten cars with Florida Licence plates. I guess in February we have to expect Floridians to be outnumbered by people from out of state.Discuss this argument using the appropriate argument rules and critical thinking from this course, plus any background knowledge you have. This includes outlining the premises and restating in concise terms the conclusion of the argument.The main idea of this question is for you to evaluate the italicized argument. Be sure to use all of the course knowledge, terminology, and skills that you feel are appropriate. When stating whether or not you believe this is a “good argument,” be sure to apply more than one perspective, including not only a formal evaluation of the argument, but consideration of what the author is trying to establish as being true.Please limit your answer to no more than two concisely written paragraphs.Part 2 (Automatic 5 points as long as you follow the directions)State three ideas, topics, techniques, or concepts that you learned in this course that you found most valuable or interesting.In one, but no more than two sentences, state why each of the above was useful or interesting.In addition, state one (or more) ideas, topics, techniques, or concepts that you thought should have been left out of this course.Question #2 (40 points)This question concerns High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS), which is found in many foods and drinks.Open the links and watch the two videos below.Video 1:Video 2:The first video (NTV) is mainly for background information, especially if you are not familiar with the controversy over HFCS (High Fructose Corn Syrup). You should focus your attention on the second link, as it gives Dr. John Sievenpiperâs evaluation of the safety of HFCS. He is a professor of medicine at the University of Toronto. This is a Five Part Queston:Write a concise outline of Dr. Sievenpiperâs main argument, clearly restating in your own words the main premises and conclusion of the main argument in the second video.Write a clear evaluation of the main argument given in the video link, using the critical thinking skills that you learned in this course. Is his argument deductively valid? Is it a sound argument? If you believe the argument is inductive in nature, say whether or not the evidence supplied supports the conclusion. If you think the argument is Inductive, give your own reasons for saying whether or not the argument is strong or weak. Discuss any possible fallacies in his argument. Discuss the credibility of the sources of any arguments used to arrive at your conclusions.State whether or not you agree with the conclusions of the main argument in the second video.Be sure to give reasons to justify your conclusions.Next conduct your own research into the issue of the safety of HFCS, and any background information that may help you arrive at your conclusion. It is not necessary to be an expert scientist in order to evaluate the argument in the video. You man confine your focus on the facts that are derived from Dr. Sievenpiper’s video and other relevant credible sources. 5. Did your research of credible sources bring about a change in your original assessment of Dr. Sievenpiperâs conclusions or did your research reinforce his conclusions? Explain and justify your answer. Be sure to include any links you used to support your answers.Question 3 (40 points)Please read and follow ALL of these instructions carefully before beginning to write your answer.Part 1(30 points)Based on the skills you have learned in this course and the new knowledge about climate change, including knowledge that you have gained within this course , write a carefully reasoned, and concise essay that consists of an Analysis of the article linked below that was published in Scientific American.You do not have to be an expert in climate science in order to arrive at your own conclusions. The skills learned in this critical thinking course, including the lectures, discussions and textbook readings on the Rules of Argument, decision making, and biased reasoning, plus background information provided in lectures and discussions, should be sufficient for you to arrive at a well reasoned and well supported extended argument that leads to a well formulated conclusion.As always, you are encouraged to do your own research in order to uncover credible sources on this issue. Note that you are expected to search for credible sources that relate to the long term issues concerning climate change as they relate to the Scientific American article.Clearly state the Main Premises and Main Conclusion of Riddley’s extended argument, and provide your own assessment of the reasoning in the article and the soundness of his conclusions. Be sure to apply all the appropriate skills you have learned in this course that are relevant to this question.Given that the article consists of an extended argument that contains several auxiliary arguments, you are encouraged to focus on the main argument and focus your analysis on not more than one or two auxiliary arguments.Also make sure your Answers for Part 1 and Part 2 are in Total no longer than the equivalent of four typewritten pages double spaced.Part 2(10 points)Using as a guide the information discussed in the Lectures and Discussion Forums in the second half of the course,describe in general terms the main features of both Ideological and Empirical Reasoning.Show how these contrasting reasoning methods may have played a role in influencing or determining the reasoning methods and Conclusions of the Scientific American article cited below.Here is the link to the Scientific American article:https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-will-not-be-dangerous-for-a-long-time/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.40 points total ______________________________________________________________________________________General Instruction reminders:Texts and secondary sources used must be cited, for example, in accordance with the MLA Manual of Style.Your writing must be strictly and entirely your own. You are expected to form your own answers. Any secondary sources consulted must be cited. Any quotations you use must be clearly indicated.

error: Content is protected !!