September 27 Essay #2 is due on turnitin. No homework due today other than Essay #2. In class, we will read David Freedman’s “The War on Stupid People,” and we will support, refute, or complicate Freedman’s contention that we marginalize average people at our own peril, socially, pragmatically, morally, and otherwise. Or we will watch the Netflix documentary Dirty Money, Episode #1, “Hard Nox.”
October 2 Homework #7: Read Jessica McCrory Calarco’s “‘Free-Range’ Parenting’s Unfair Double Standard” and address the reasons the author uses to support her argument. A look at the Turpin family shows that “free-range” can go too far.
October 4 Homework #8: Read Michael Gerson’s “The Last Temptation” and write a 3-paragraph essay that explains why so many evangelicals (about 85%) support the “least religious president in living memory.” We will also look at electronic scooter debate.
October 9 Homework #9: Read Gabrielle Glaser’s “The Irrationality of Alcoholics Anonymous” and write a 3-paragraph essay that explains why Glaser believes AA is an overrated program.
October 11 Homework #10: Read Charlie Warzel’s “Infocalypse Now” and Matt Taibbi’s “Can We be Saved from Facebook?” and write a 3-paragraph essay about how fake news is an unstoppable juggernaut that could destroy civilization as we know it. We will connect these essays to critiques about Facebook and other forms of social media that are contributing to the breakdown of the free world as fascist forces manipulate social media to promote their agenda.
October 16 Peer Edit for Essay #3 and Portfolio Part 1 for 100 points up to Homework #10.
October 18 Essay #3 is due on turnitin
Essay #3 Due 10-18-18
Option A
In the context of David Freedman’s “The War on Stupid People,” support, refute, or complicate Freedman’s contention that we marginalize average people at our own peril, socially, pragmatically, morally, and otherwise.
Option B
In the context of the Netflix documentary Dirty Money, Episode #1, "Hard Nox," support, refute, or complicate the assertion that in spite of Volkswagen's 30 billion dollars paid in fines and legal fees for committing fraud and other crimes, that their ascent in the world economy is evidence that Volkswagen, as an agency of unbridled corporate greed, has triumphed over the wheels of justice. For your sources, you can use the documentary, the Vulture review, and the Atlantic review.
Option C
Read Jessica McCrory Calarco’s essay “‘Free-Range’ Parenting’s Unfair Double Standard” and support or refute her claim. See Washington Post and Reason’s “The Fragile Generation.”
Option D
In the context of Michael Gerson’s “The Last Temptation,” support, refute, or complicate the claim that evangelicals are shooting their foot by supporting the “least traditionally religious president in living memory.”
Option E
Write an argumentative essay that addresses the viability of electric scooters as a thriving business model for alternative modes of transportation. Consider the advances in technology, the share economy, and the benefits of regulations measured against sidewalk traffic and legal liability.
Option F
Read Gabrielle Glaser’s “The Irrationality of Alcoholics Anonymous” and support, refute, or complicate Glaser’s assertion that AA is an overrated, untested program.
Option G
Read Charlie Warzel’s “Infocalypse Now” and Matt Taibbi’s “Can We Be Saved from Facebook?” and defend, refute, or complicate the authors’ contention that fake news is an unstoppable juggernaut that could destroy civilization as we know it. You can connect this essay to critiques about Facebook and other forms of social media that are allegedly contributing to the breakdown of the free world as fascist forces manipulate social media to promote their agenda. Also see Franklin Foer’s “The End of Reality.”
Ubiquity of Intelligence Tests:
Intelligence Tests Are Biased, But They're Not Going Away
IQ tests are biased on many levels.
IQ tests cater to the educated and the privileged.
But regardless of their faults, IQ tests and similar tests will become more and more pervasive as the technology advances to the point that DNA testing will be used. Some say we won't even need to put pen to paper to test our intelligence. A $50 hereditary IQ test may soon be available.
People perform better on IQ tests when they are moved from stressful, economically-challenged background to more privileged background; when they are given monetary reward for doing better on the test; when they are allowed to take the test during a smarter period of their lives; and other factors.
Regardless of the imperfections of tests, there is still an Intelligence Distribution with a small percentage on top, a large percentage in the middle, and a small percentage at the bottom.
Society is obsessed with identifying the small group at the top. Success is largely built on proving that one is part of that elite group. Privileged parents will use all the resources at their disposal to give their children a fighting chance of being labeled as being part of the Super Group.
We can object to the Fight to be on Top and the unfair advantages bestowed on the privileged, but the system, as rigged as it is, is not going away.
We can object to the "ruthless Darwinian instincts" that drive us to create a brutal social and economic hierarchy, but that is the state of affairs, the status quo.
David Freedman, the author of "The War on Stupid People," makes the claim that our favoritism toward the smart and our bias against the less smart may not only be unfair but dangerous to everyone in society.
One. Up to the 1950s, the zeitgeist accommodated friendly mediocrity as long as people were decent, had a hard-working, honest character and groomed themselves, they'd be okay.
Two. Then the connection of science and intelligence tests become popular and an ubiquitous part of American values. As a nation, we became obsessed with IQ. We became obsessed with separating out the dumb from the smart. As a result, our default setting was to scorn and denigrate "S people."
Three. Disdain for the Stupid permeated entertainment, which freely mocked the dumb. In a world of political correctness, the dumb remained a free and easy punching bag. There is a popular YouTube Channel that features a dumb neighbor. People gawk at this dumb neighbor all day long. In the entertainment world, Dumb = Funny.
Four. Yet, being sub par in intelligence is no laughing matter. The Below Average are America's majority. Worse, 80 million Americans have IQ scores of 90 or below.
Five. Having a low IQ is associated with a myriad of ailments: early death, mental illness, violence, to name a few.
Six. Currently, our culture pushes high IQ. For example, the job website Monster emphasizes jobs with lots of intelligence testing. The more tests the better.
Seven. A culture that fetishizes intelligence or commits unbridled idolatry of intelligence over morality and ethics inches toward the Cult of the Selfish Individual championed by Ayn Rand, who many say perverted the idea of Nietzsch's Ubermensch (Superman) to justify the idea that the smart creative and productive people of society should let the "dead weight" of society, the poor and the dumb, die off as a natural part of Darwinian selection.
The Individual Genius, according to Ayn Rand, must forsake the poor and the "lesser minds" of the human race in order that human affairs ascend without being chained to the mediocrity of "lesser people."
This philosophy is at odds with Christian mercy, which has people of faith going into hopeless places all over the world to bring care, aid, and compassion.
For Ayn Rand and her ilk, such compassion is a perversion and will only increase the population of the herd.
The Ayn Rand Cult, known as Objectivism, is described by a former cult member.
Eight. Being smart doesn't equal an ideal worker. Super smart employees can be lousy, difficult, narcissistic, resistant to criticism, lacking in self-awareness, lacking in interpersonal skills, and so on.
Nine. Blind veneration of intelligence has killed many non-college work, creating a deep unemployment crisis.
Ten. "Fetishization of IQ" makes smarts a premium for romance, dating, love, marriage.
Eleven. The Cult of the Intellect creates more and more Have-Nots.
Twelve. Poverty lowers IQ significantly. See Princeton study.
Thirteen. "We must stop glorifying intelligence and treating our society as a playground for the smart minority."
Fourteen. We need to address the needs of the majority.
Fifteen. Currently, the status quo is a silent, implicit nod to Ayn Rand's Cult of the Superior Individual and a rejection of compassion for all based on the faith of the world's major religions.
Option Six. In the context of “The War on Stupid People” by David H. Freedman, support, refute, or complicate the notion that society places misplaced admiration for intelligent people.
Is War on "S People" Justified?
Freedman posits the question: Should our society do more to accommodate average and sub-average intelligent people who comprise the majority of Americans? Or should we say, in concert with today's status quo: "Tough luck, Average and "S" People. Darwinian evolution compels us to leave you behind because the human race is stronger when we prioritize resources and privileges for the Smartest and let the Less Smart die on the vine."
Loving and making provisions for the less fortunate is usually considered a Christian ideal and a value held by most mainstream religions. But most industrial societies have veered away from that ideal. There is a school of thought, often associated with the German philosopher Nietzsche and American self-promoter Ayn Rand, both considered anti-religious, who argue that the human race becomes better when it abandons the less fortunate--the Less Smart in this case--in order to let the Super Smart "spread their wings and fly."
Sample Thesis Statements
David Freedman makes a compelling case that we have made a fetish of intelligence to our own detriment.
Freedman makes the compelling case that our unbridled veneration of high intelligence has blinded us to many societal dangers, which include _______________, ________________, ________________, and __________________.
To accommodate the Super Smart in the name of promoting radical individualism as championed by Nietzsche and Ayn Rand is to go down a dangerous road of heartless Darwinism, which will disrupt civilization as we know it.
While there are some societal dangers from failing to accommodate Average and "S" People, it would even be more dangerous to violate our current status quo, which prioritizes privileges for the Super Smart because ______________, __________________, ________________, and ____________________.
Recognizing Logical Fallacies
Begging the Question
Begging the question assumes that a statement is self-evident when it actually requires proof.
Major Premise: Fulfilling all my major desires is the only way I can be happy.
Minor Premise: I can’t afford when of my greatest desires in life, a Lexus GS350.
Conclusion: Therefore, I can never be happy.
Circular Reasoning
Circular reasoning occurs when we support a statement by restating it in different terms.
Stealing is wrong because it is illegal.
Admitting women into the men’s club is wrong because it’s an invalid policy.
Your essay is woeful because of its egregious construction.
Your boyfriend is hideous because of his heinous characteristics.
I have to sell my car because I’m ready to sell it.
I can’t spend time with my kids because it’s too time-consuming.
I need to spend more money on my presents than my family’s presents because I need bigger and better presents.
I’m a great father because I’m the best father my children have ever had.
Weak Analogy or Faulty Comparison
Analogies are never perfect but they can be powerful. The question is do they have a degree of validity to make them worth the effort.
A toxic relationship is like cancer that gets worse and worse (fine).
Sugar is high-octane fuel to use before your workout (weak because there is nothing high-octane about a substance that causes you to crash and converts into fat and creates other problems)
Free education is a great flame and the masses are moths flying into the flames of destruction. (horribly false analogy)
Ad Hominem Fallacy (Personal Attack)
“Who are you to be a marriage counselor? You’ve been divorced six times?”
A lot of people give great advice and present sound arguments even if they don’t apply their principles to their lives, so we should focus on the argument, not a personal attack.
“So you believe in universal health care, do you? I suppose you’re a communist and you hate America as well.”
Making someone you disagree with an American-hating communist is invalid and doesn’t address the actual argument.
“What do you mean you don’t believe in marriage? What are you, a crazed nihilist, an unrepentant anarchist, an immoral misanthrope, a craven miscreant?”
Straw Man Fallacy
You twist and misconstrue your opponent’s argument to make it look weaker than it is when you refute it. Instead of attacking the real issue, you aim for a weaker issue based on your deliberate misinterpretation of your opponent’s argument.
“Those who are against universal health care are heartless. They obviously don’t care if innocent children die.”
Hasty Generalization (Jumping to a Conclusion)
“I’ve had three English instructors who are middle-aged bald men. Therefore, all English instructors are middle-aged bald men.”
“I’ve met three Americans with false British accents and they were all annoying. Therefore, all Americans, such as Madonna, who contrive British accents are annoying.” Perhaps some Americans do so ironically and as a result are more funny than annoying.
Either/Or Fallacy
There are only two choices to an issue is an over simplification and an either/or fallacy.
“Either you be my girlfriend or you don’t like real men.”
“Either you be my boyfriend or you’re not a real American.”
“Either you play football for me or you’re not a real man.”
“Either you’re for us or against us.” (The enemy of our enemy is our friend is everyday foreign policy.)
“Either you agree with me about increasing the minimum wage, or you’re okay with letting children starve to death.”
“Either you get a 4.0 and get admitted into USC, or you’re only half a man.”
Equivocation
Equivocation occurs when you deliberately twist the meaning of something in order to justify your position.
“You told me the used car you just sold me was in ‘good working condition.’”
“I said ‘good,’ not perfect.”
The seller is equivocating.
“I told you to be in bed by ten.”
“I thought you meant to be home by ten.”
“You told me you were going to pay me the money you owe me on Friday.”
“I didn’t know you meant the whole sum.”
“You told me you were going to take me out on my birthday.”
“Technically speaking, the picnic I made for us in the backyard was a form of ‘going out.’”
Red Herring Fallacy
This fallacy is to throw a distraction in your opponent’s face because you know a distraction may help you win the argument.
“Barack Obama wants us to support him but his father was a Muslim. How can we trust the President on the war against terrorism when he has terrorist ties?”
“You said you were going to pay me my thousand dollars today. Where is it?”
“Dear friend, I’ve been diagnosed with a very serious medical condition. Can we talk about our money issue some other time?”
Slippery Slope Fallacy
We go down a rabbit hole of exaggerated consequences to make our point sound convincing.
“If we allow gay marriage, we’ll have to allow people to marry gorillas.”
“If we allow gay marriage, my marriage to my wife will be disrespected and dishonored.”
Appeal to Authority
Using a celebrity to promote an energy drink doesn’t make this drink effective in increasing performance.
Listening to an actor play a doctor on TV doesn’t make the pharmaceutical he’s promoting safe or effective.
Tradition Fallacy
“We’ve never allowed women into our country club. Why should we start now?”
“Women have always served men. That’s the way it’s been and that’s the way it always should be.”
Misuse of Statistics
Using stats to show causality when it’s a condition of correlation or omitting other facts.
“Ninety-nine percent of people who take this remedy see their cold go away in ten days.” (Colds go away on their own).
“Violent crime from home intruders goes down twenty percent in a home equipped with guns.” (more people in those homes die of accidental shootings or suicides)
Post Hoc, Confusing Causality with Correlation
Taking cold medicine makes your cold go away. Really?
The rooster crows and makes the sun go up. Really?
You drink on a Thursday night and on Friday morning you get an A on your calculus exam. Really?
You stop drinking milk and you feel stronger. Really? (or is it a placebo effect?)
Non Sequitur (It Does Not Follow)
The conclusion in an argument is not relevant to the premises.
Megan drives a BMW, so she must be rich.
McMahon understands the difference between a phrase and a dependent clause; therefore, he must be a genius.
Whenever I eat chocolate cake, I feel good. Therefore, chocolate cake must be good for me.
Bandwagon Fallacy
Because everyone believes something, it must be right.
“You can steal a little at work. Everyone else does.”
“In Paris, ninety-nine percent of all husbands have a secret mistress. Therefore adultery is not immoral.”
Comments