Essay #2
Minimum of 2 sources for your MLA Works Cited page.
Choice A
Watch Netflix documentary Ronnie Coleman: The King. Considered to be the greatest bodybuilder of all time, Coleman is now on crutches, faces a lifetime of excruciating pain, must take opioid pain medication, may have to be consigned to a wheelchair, and by most accounts the abuse he took to become a champion bodybuilder is the reason for his condition. The film celebrates Coleman’s life principle to persist in doing what he loves, but doing what he loves comes with a price: excruciating, life-altering injuries. Is doing what we love worth it? In this context, develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the notion that in order to achieve exceptional success, we are justified to make sacrifices of our body, minds, and souls. Is Coleman’s current condition justified by his success and his heroic drive to do what he loves? Answer this question and be sure to have a counterargument section.
Choice B
Read LA Times editorial “Why not let homeless college students park in campus lots?” and develop and argumentative thesis that addresses the claim that community colleges are acting in students’ best interests by providing sleeping spaces in the parking lots.
Choice C
Read Elizabeth Kolbert’s “Why Facts Don’t Change Minds” and “What’s New About Conspiracy Theories?” and develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the connection between irrational belief and the failure to change people’s minds.
Choice D
Read Jason Brennan’s “Can epistocracy, or knowledge-based voting, fix democracy?” and agree or refute Brennan's claim that we need an epistocracy.
Choice E
Read Ibram Kendi’s “White Terrorists Give Political Cover to Other American Prejudices” and develop a thesis that addresses how persuasive Kendi is in making his case that white terrorism is rooted in mainstream racism.
Choice F
Read Atossa Araxia Abrahamian’s “Money for Nothing” and develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the author’s skepticism toward Universal Basic Income. Update: I found a better essay to address: "Should the Government Give Everyone $1,000 a Month?" by Spencer Bokat-Lindell in The New York Times.
September 17 Essay 1 Due on turnitin; Ronnie Coleman; debate on providing sleepover parking lots: Read LA Times editorial “Why not let homeless college students park in campus lots?” and develop and argumentative thesis about the pros and cons of providing sleeping spaces for college students. Homework #5 for next class is to read Elizabeth Kolbert’s “Why Facts Don’t Change Minds” and “What’s New About Conspiracy Theories?” and in 200 words explain the connection between irrational belief and the failure to change people’s minds.
September 19 Go over Elizabeth Kolbert’s “Why Facts Don’t Change Minds” and “What’s New About Conspiracy Theories?” and in 200 words explain the connection between irrational belief and the failure to change people’s minds.
Homework #6 for next class is to read Jason Brennan’s “Can epistocracy, or knowledge-based voting, fix democracy?” and explain why Brennan believes we need an epistocracy.
September 24 Go over Jason Brennan’s “Can epistocracy, or knowledge-based voting, fix democracy?” and explain why Brennan believes we need an epistocracy.
Homework #7 for next class is to read Ibram Kendi’s “White Terrorists Give Political Cover to Other American Prejudices” and in 200 words explain how persuasive Kendi is in making his case that white terrorism is rooted in mainstream racism.
September 26 Go over Ibram Kendi’s “White Terrorists Give Political Cover to Other American Prejudices” and in 200 words explain how persuasive Kendi is in making his case that white terrorism is rooted in mainstream racism.
Homework #8 for next class is to read Vox essay “The case for and against universal basic income in the United States.” In 200 words, summarize the author's argument.
October 1 Go over Vox essay “The case for and against universal basic income in the United States.” Homework #9 is to read Atossa Araxia Abrahamian’s “Money for Nothing” and in 200 words explain the author’s skepticism toward Universal Basic Income.
October 3 We will watch a YouTube video that explains UBI. We will go over Atossa Araxia Abrahamian’s “Money for Nothing” and in 200 words explain the author’s skepticism toward Universal Basic Income. We will grade Portfolio #1, based on responses 1-9.
October 8 Chromebook In-Class Objective: Write introduction and thesis paragraph.
October 10 Chromebook In-Class Objective: Write 3 supporting paragraphs, your counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, and your conclusion.
October 15 Essay 2 due on turnitin.
Minimum of 2 sources for your MLA Works Cited page.
Choice F (Updated)
Read Atossa Araxia Abrahamian’s “Money for Nothing” and develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the author’s skepticism toward Universal Basic Income. Update: I found a better essay to address: "Should the Government Give Everyone $1,000 a Month?" by Spencer Bokat-Lindell in The New York Times.
Suggested Outline:
Paragraph 1, Introduction: Summarize predicted unemployment crisis that could hit the world in the next 20-50 years. Or you can summarize the major pros and cons.
Paragraph 2, Defend or refute the claim that UBI is an effective solution to mass unemployment.
Paragraphs 3-6: Your supporting paragraphs.
Paragraph 7: Counterargument-rebuttal
Paragraph 8: Your conclusion, a powerful restatement of your thesis.
For other sources:
Read Oren Cass’ “Why a Universal Basic Income Is a Terrible Idea” and Universal Basic Income explained, UBI being used in other countries, UBI explained by Jordan Peterson as a life-purpose problem.
Case for and against UBI in USA according to Vox
No Strings Attached in LARB, 2018
Arguments in Support of Universal Basic Income (UBI)
One. 47% of the jobs will be lost in the next 10-20 years. We have a new paradigm that requires a new way of providing a livelihood to our citizens.
Two. UBI, which is a monthly stipend to everyone regardless of income, would be nearly a trillion dollars cheaper a year than current welfare system.
Three. UBI would eliminate need for minimum wage. Lower minimum wage would encourage more hiring.
Four. Because UBI doesn't give more money for children, UBI doesn't reward one lifestyle over another.
Five. Citizens would have more time and resources to train and get educated for more career options presuming they used their time and money wisely.
Six. Most stay-at-home parents are women who have not been justly paid for their domestic work over the centuries. UBI would help remedy that injustice.
Seven. UBI gives citizens an escape valve from an abusive job or relationship. Having guaranteed money makes it easier to bail when you have to. "This is jacked up, man. I've got to bail."
Eight. 13K a year isn't so much that you would be content to retire in your house. Most people would want at the very least to supplement their meager income with part-time or full-time work. More enterprising citizens would use their free time and money for education and job re-training.
Nine. UBI would eliminate welfare abuses and welfare fraud because UBI spells the death of welfare as we know it.
Ten. Providing for the citizens with UBI would lessen the risk of the kind of discontent that leads to nationalist nativism, a racist political movement that makes one ethnic tribe hate on immigrants as scapegoats for the country's woes.
Eleven. Addressing the counterargument that not having to work would make us lazy depressed slobs, some would argue that technology is forcing us to change and adapt. Just as coal workers are inevitably going to become extinct in the next century, we must adapt to a new employment landscape. We must either adapt or die. We must not be chained to our "Calvinism hangover," the deeply American notion that work is salvation and unemployment is a sign of sin and depravity.
Twelve. The rich know they have to share their wealth because the throng with torches and pitch forks will be knocking on their doors. In other words, UBI is much needed pacifier, a form of social control that augments the safety of the rich.
Thirteen. The open debate about UBI--the biggest debate--is the philosophical question about the nature of work. Some say UBI will kill work and that without work people will descend into depression and pathology. Others say we will adapt to this new economic landscape. One argument in favor of UBI is that even if we don't know the answer to this question definitively, we HAVE NO CHOICE but to adapt to a world where close to 50% of jobs will be lost.
Fourteen. Technology will change the human animal on a chemical level and we will be able to adapt to the new work environment as evidenced by Elon Musk's exploration into his new neural lace company. Such technologies will make us smarter and more adaptive as human beings.
Fifteen. Even if we concede that not working will turn us into lazy bums, that is the lesser evil of the economic injustice social chaos resulting from not having UBI.
Arguments Against Universal Basic Income (UBI)
One. A dependent society is a dysfunctional society. Dependence, in other words, leads to laziness.
Two. A lack of self-reliance diseases the soul and corrupts society. The dependent will drag down the producers.
Three. Acute dependence leads to totalitarianism and dehumanization. Once you take a government handout, you become vulnerable to the government's control over every part of your life. See The Giver.
Four. Acute dependence breaks down the family unit. Parents aren't responsible for their children; the government is. Why stick to your family, when you don't rely on them?
Five. Being "off the grid" makes one chronically depressed, non-productive, and unemployable. Our identity and sense of wellbeing is tied to having a job.
Six. There is no increment for children. Why not? Because you're not encouraged to have children to get more. Some find this a form of lifestyle control. Others like it.
Seven. The estimated 13K a year isn't enough though some say that still puts people in the top 12% of all global earners.
Eight. Unless all countries had equal UBI, the more desirable UBI countries would be a magnet for people of other countries who'd swarm into "healthy UBI" countries to bilk their system.
Nine. UBI is giving 15% of average national income. This would require tax revenue of 15% of national income. That is too much tax, some say, for such a small income.
Consult the following:
Universal Basic Income: Side Effect of the Tech Revolution?
The Progressive Case for Replacing the Welfare State with Basic Income
We can afford UBI, but is it a good idea?
Why Universal Basic Income Is a Terrible Idea
A Primer or Introduction to Universal Basic Income
Economist gives us an introduction to UBI.
Psychology Change Needed for Universal Basic Income
Arguments Against Universal Basic Income (UBI)
One. A dependent society is a dysfunctional society.
Two. A lack of self-reliance diseases the soul and corrupts society.
Three. Acute dependence leads to totalitarianism and dehumanization. See The Giver.
Four. Acute dependence breaks down the family unit. Parents aren't responsible for their children; the government is.
Five. Being "off the grid" makes one chronically depressed, non-productive, and unemployable.
Arguments for Universal Basic Income
3 Reasons for Universal Basic Income from Brookings Institute
Pro-Work Argument for UBI
Washington Post article that argues UBI won't make America great again.
Challenging the American Work Ethic
There is a notion in America, from the beginning of its European history, that being a hard worker means being noble, virtuous, and successful.
The contrary is also assumed: If you're poor and unemployed, your life is evidence that you are a member of the damned. You are morally depraved and bankrupt.
This notion comes from a form of Protestantism called Calvinism. John Calvin said evidence of being a member of God's elect was being a hard worker. German philosopher Max Weber said this became the "Protestant Work Ethic," the fuel of American capitalism.
Read "The Protestant Work Ethic Is Real"
Sample Thesis Statements
Universal Basic Income is doomed to fail because it is a concession of a failed economic system, a surrender to the oligarchy, and a miserable fake solution to poverty and human dignity.
Failed or not, Universal Basic Income is the palliative dog treat that will be stuffed down our throats in order to pacify the masses from revolt in a new economy that will surely leave more and more people behind.
While sure to go through its growing pains, UBI must be embraced because we have no choice but to hinge our hopes for human dignity and humanitarian aid to the masses through UBI and be diligent as we perfect it over time.
UBI is the stinky monster we must go to bed with because without that stinky monster we will have to go to bed cold, wet, and hungry.
Conservatives and liberals alike rightly embrace UBI because it is the reasonable response to permanent mass unemployment and the need for a streamlined welfare program for the have-nots.
Far-left pundits are correct to reject UBI as a crappy drug designed to shut up the masses who will be getting punk-fed while the 1% laugh their way to the bank.
Even if UBI works on an economic level, human beings are not psychologically and spiritually hard-wired to live a life without structure, responsibility, and accountability, and as a result, UBI will spell the death to millions of the unemployed masses whose crap existence will be at its essence a condition of moral and intellectual dissolution.
Sample Essay on UBI
Take What Sucks Less
Sure, UBI sucks. It’s hardly enough money to create economic justice. It’s surely a pacifier for the masses who are getting punk fed the bare minimum to live a half-decent existence. I’m also certain that UBI will relegate most of us to some sweaty, dank room where we’ll intoxicate ourselves with a myriad of unsavory substances while looking on with bloodshot eyes at some entertainment or other on YouTube or Netflix.
We will grow fat, complacent, brain-dead. We’ll become less than human. We’ll become more like zombies, slogging through life without an ounce of pride or dignity as we live a sedentary life without individual goals, responsibility, or life purpose. We will be soulless pods hooked up to our private entertainment centers while the 1%, the real people, pull the strings, create technology that advances civilization and enjoy the spoils of their efforts as full human beings flourishing in some opulent environment while the rest of us poor UBI-receiving bots live like crammed sardines in shared housing with our equally depressed, brain-dead zombie roommates.
So am I arguing against UBI? Hell no. Even if our lives are as crappy as the one I described above, the life without UBI as we head for the Great Unemployment Age presents an even greater hellish existence, one with starvation, a lack of basic medical supplies and treatment, and abject homelessness.
Yeah, UBI sucks, but not getting UBI sucks even more. Don’t count on the government to share the 1%’s wealth with the rest of us. The 1% will only share as much as they have to, and they have calculated that giving us just enough UBI so that we don’t become a raging, lawless mob is worth the 4-trillion UBI annual price tag. We should just admit we lost the class war.
We are now in the unenviable position where we can either take our UBI pittance, which sucks, or not take our UBI table scraps, which sucks even more. That is our dilemma. We must take this painful truth on the chin and move on with our crappy lives. The alternative is certain death.
The Sucks Less Approach Is Hideous
The above argument, which essentially paints us as starving dogs that should be grateful for the table scraps of UBI is so full of grotesque logical fallacies that the person who wrote this specious argument should be thrown into Logical Fallacy Prison.
For one, the writer gives us a false dilemma of only two choices: A crappy life with UBI or an even crappier life without UBI. There are other possibilities that the writer does not address because those possibilities present an inconvenience to his argument. For example, some people will continue to work and use UBI to supplement their income. Others will use UBI to fund their higher education, but the above writer is too busy enjoying his despair to consider these possibilities. Secondly, the writer presents a pessimism that is unfounded on evidence. He seems to think dehumanization from UBI is inevitable, yet he presents no facts to back up his claim. Rather, he indulges in his personal crapulent attitude and wishes to impose it on the rest of us, as if he’s doing us a favor by lavishing us with some universal truth, yet he is not. He is merely a Minister of Darkness contaminating us with his gospel of despair.
Finally, he assumes the worst case scenario of UBI and paints a broad brush over the human reaction to receiving guaranteed income to fulfill our basic life needs without addressing the complexities and unknowable, tentative outcomes. In short, the above writer is a grotesque nihilist who is hell-bent on infecting us with his anguish and despair. For the truth about UBI, I suggest we look elsewhere.
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