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 explain why Brennan believes 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.
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.”
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.
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.
Another LA Times editorial addresses unintended consequences.
Bill AB302 was killed.
"Why Not Less Homeless Students Park in Campus Parking Lots?"
Suggested Essay Outline for Homeless Debate
Paragraph 1: Explain the homeless crisis for California community college students.
Paragraph 2: Your thesis, defend or refute the case that community colleges would be doing a service to the community by providing overnight parking facilities for homeless students in their cars.
Paragraphs 3-6: Develop your supporting paragraphs.
Paragraph 7: Develop a counterargument and rebuttal.
Paragraph 8: Your conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis.
Paragraph 9: Videos of homeless students can pull our heart strings by showing us very sympathetic people trying to get by, but do these portrayals encompass the full spectrum of homeless people who will be using the college service and if not, does this not constitute cheap propaganda?
Some Points to Consider:
One. How can we enforce cars that never move and essentially create a permanent homeless encampment?
Two. Will this policy create a homeless magnet that gets out of control and hurts other students?
Three. Is this well-intentioned policy punishing other students?
Four. Will lack of bathrooms result in people going to the bathroom outdoors and creating a health crisis and a repugnant environment?
Five. Will colleges be afflicted with liability for all the crimes committed in these parking lots?
Six. Can colleges afford proportionate security to the growth of people living in the parking lots?
Seven. Should these encampments be allowed at colleges close to elementary schools?
Eight. Will the community become bitter and sour at the community colleges for allowing a festering wound to occur in their "backyards"?
Nine. Is this policy even a true solution to the homeless crisis?
“Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds” by Elizabeth Kolbert
Central Question:
Regardless of evidence, why do formed impressions stay with us?
One. We are afflicted with the Backfire Effect: The more others prove we’re wrong, the more we dig in our heels, fight back, and stubbornly hold to our erroneous opinions and obsolete beliefs.
Two. When facts destroy our worldview, we react with physical threat, what is called the fight-or-flight response.
For example, for decades I thought yogurt was a “health food,” and then one day my wife told me that yogurt, the kind larded with sugar, is bad for you. Often, sweetened yogurt has more sugar than ice cream. When my wife told me this, I shouted in protest, but when I read the ingredients, I realized she was correct. I was upset and anxious for weeks after. How could yogurt be a diabetes supplement? I felt betrayed.
Three. Some academics attribute our malformed, stubbornly held beliefs to an adaptation to fit with the tribe through cooperation and collaboration. We can only cooperate if we share values and beliefs.
Four. Another cause of holding on to fallacious beliefs and opinions is confirmation bias in which we cherry pick evidence to conform to our pre-existing beliefs and assumptions.
Confirmation bias is also called “Myside bias” because we tend to base our bias on “our team” or “our tribe.”
Five. We also fail to adjust our opinions to the presented evidence because we suffer from the “illusion of explanatory depth,” meaning we are less knowledgeable about a topic than we believe. This is a polite way of saying we don’t know how ignorant we are.
A variation of the above idea is the Dunning-Kruger Effect (see Ted-Ed video), which states that the dumber we are the smarter we think we are.
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.
Essay Strategy:
Write about the failure of changing people's minds in specific context.
For example, you might develop a thesis in the context of anti-vaxxers or climate change deniers.
"Humans need to become smarter thinkers to beat climate denial" in The Guardian
Measles Spells the Death of Critical Thinking
Sample Outline:
In paragraph 1, summarize Kolbert's essay "Why Facts Don't Change Our Minds" and explain why we remain biased even in the face of contrary evidence.
Paragraph 2, your thesis: argue that Anti-Vaxxers or Flat-Earthers, or Global Warming Deniers or some other Irrational Tribe embodies the Backfire Effect.
Paragraphs 3-6 are your supporting paragraphs.
Paragraph 7 is your counterargument: You anticipate how the tribe in question will object to your criticism and you will refute their counterargument.
Paragraph 8: Your conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis.
Metaphors to Explain How Misinformation Trolls Are Spreading Disease Throughout the World:
World War Z
Game of Thrones: Night King wants to kill Bran Stark because Bran represents memory. The Night King wants to erase memory and reign over kingdom of eternal darkness.
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
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.