Critical Thinking Should be Essential for All Citizens
What is critical thinking and why is it essential for society? Consult Alan Jacobs’ book How to Think in which he talks about the moral foundation. Also, read Jonathan Rauch’s The Constitution of Knowledge in which he talks about the standards for creating a shared epistemic reality.
We need to be fair players or good actors in “The Game.” We can have a critical thinking society or a troll society. The former is built on a shared moral code, shared epistemic standards, and shared rules. The ladder is built on epistemic tricks, gaslighting, nihilism, racial tribalism, and moral depravity.
An example of a society run by bad actors is in Billy Ball’s autobiographical essay “My 6-Year-Old Son Died. Then the Anti-vaxxers Found Out.”
Ball’s child died from cerebral-swelling as a result of a freak accident.
The trolls came out to use the father’s pain as an occasion to flex their anti-vaxxer muscle, an immoral act that was not logically connected to the subject at hand. In critical thinking, that’s called a non sequitur.
Trolls celebrate in cruelty and sadism, taking pleasure in other people’s grief. White tribalists did the same to slaves, telling the slaves they were “happy” being subjected to white rule. “Slavery is the best thing that ever happened to you,” they said and say to this day.
The medical community dismissed the Covid vaccine as playing any role in the boy’s death, but the trolls rolled out a bunch of conspiracies.
In Troll World, unleashing thousands of conspiracies fatigues the public and they reach a point of despair: “Nothing can be true.”
The South did the same in their fake explanation of the Civil War, not caused by slavery but by “Northern aggression” and “state rights.”
The trolls took the father’s son’s photos and “wrote vile things” on them. In Troll World, there is no moral bottom.
The trolls lectured the father: They accused him of failing to protect his child, an accusation based on shrill emotion and zero evidence, another quality of Troll World.
Ball refers to these bad actors as “the strange ghouls on the Internet.” History has always had strange ghouls, including the white supremacists who shamelessly defended slavery with their conspiracy theories, but in free democracies, those ghouls have been small in number and have lived in the margins.
Much to our terror, we live in a country where these ghouls have multiplied in numbers, ascended to media and political power and threaten the very democracy we have taken for granted.
While not as flagrant as the case of the trolls that attacked writer Billy Ball, The Game Changers uses deception and engages in “bad acting” to get their message across. This is a shame because by compromising their credibility and integrity, the movie makers have made the plant-based diet less appealing, not more so. Had they been honest about the nutritional and other challenges of a vegan diet, they could have won more sympathy for a cause that has some noble aspirations like healthier eating, sparing animals the merciless cruelty of livestock production, and saving the planet.
Building Block #1 Due March 25
The Assignment: Your first paragraph
In a paragraph of about 200 words, explain why someone watching The Game Changers with an uncritical eye might be seduced by its message. In what ways does the documentary appeal to us? How is the documentary effective in pressing our emotional buttons and making us "want to drink the Kool-Aid"?
Building Block #2: Due March 29
The Assignment: Develop a Thesis for Paragraph 2 of Your Essay
In a paragraph of about 200 words, develop a claim that explains how persuasive the Netflix documentary The Game Changers is in terms of ethos, logos, and pathos. Be sure your thesis statement is followed by mapping components that will direct your body paragraphs.
Study of Men’s Health Article That Critiques The Game Changers
“This New Documentary Says Meat Will Kill You. Here’s Why It’s Wrong”
By Paul Kita, Published September 16, 2019
Commentary Based on Summary, Paragraph, and Direct Quotations
Plant-Based has replaced the ugly word vegan. The latter represents joyless, pinch-faced eating. On the other hand, plant-based evokes natural, organic, healthy, and joyful.
The Netflix documentary The Game Changers “pushes” the plant-based lifestyle. Produced by James Cameron, the film argues that “eating any animal products--including meat, fish, eggs, and dairy--can hinder athletic performance, wreak havoc on your heart, impair sexual function, and lead to an early death.”
The film’s through-line or narrative arc is watching MMA fighter James Wilks convert from an omnivore to a plant-based diet.
Paul Kita’s verdict on the film can be contained in the following:
“Except that The Game Changers presents only one side of the facts, often via controversial sourcesLinks to an external site., grand extrapolations from small studies, and statements that are flat-out misleading.”
- One-sided facts
- Dubious or less-than-credible sources
- Exaggerated claims from small studies
- Misleading and deceptive statements
Kita explains how there is insufficient research on claims about the benefits of a plant-based diet.
The first “study” is no study at all but a short narrative. As Kita writes:
Wilks begins the movie, and builds its entire concept around, a study he came across that reported Roman gladiators didn’t eat meat.
Except that the study isn’t actually a study.
It’s a short narrativeLinks to an external site. by Andrew Curry, a contributing writer to Archaeology, a publication of the Archaeological Institute of America.
Curry recounts a visit to the Medical University of Vienna where he held a gladiator skull and remarks upon how gladiators ate “a vegetarian diet rich in carbohydrates, with the occasional calcium supplement.”
There does exist researchLinks to an external site. on gladiators following non-meat diets, some of which is later cited in the film, but Wilks still calls a narrative a “study” when it is not a study.*
Yes, this is a minor point, but it's indicative of the often misleading portrayal of "research" to come.
***
Death of Ethos
In other words, Kita observes that the film begins with a loss of credibility. In a critical thinking class, we call credibility an important part of establishing a persuasive argument--ethos.
From the very beginning, The Game Changers has problems with ethos.
Flashy "Research" > Ethos
Perhaps to compensate for its lack of ethos and credible studies, the film tries to razzle-dazzle us with flashy research. As Kita writes:
And The Game Changers is filled with research. Studies flash upon the screen at a wild rate—sometimes three or four in a row. Medical experts offer long explanations of scientific conclusions in lab-coat speak. The amount of data is daunting, with the implication being: Look at all the science! How can veganism be wrong?!
The problem is that the study findings are often twisted and presented to the viewer without giving them a full understanding of the research.
In one instance where Wilks does cite actual peer-reviewed researchLinks to an external site., he narrates: “And when it comes to gaining strength and muscle mass, research comparing plant and animal protein has shown that as long as the proper amount of amino acids are consumed the source is irrelevant.”
Crucial Omission
What Wilks doesn’t call out is that the same study states this: “as a group, vegetarians have lower mean muscle creatine concentrations than do omnivores, and this may affect supramaximal exercise performance.”
Elsewhere in The Game Changers, Wilks name-checks studies that feature small sample sizes and then extrapolates broad generalizations.
***
Cherry-Picking Facts
In other words, even when credible studies are given, the principals cherry-pick the facts to paint a distorted picture. Again, such cherry-picking diminishes the film’s ethos.
In addition to ethos, we must use another important factor to be persuasive in our argumentation--logos. The word logos in this context refers to the logic and reasoning that is used. We see a lapse of both ethos and logos in the misinterpretation of a 2010 study.
As the writer observes:
The most glaring instance of this is when Wilks claims that cow’s milk can increase estrogen and lower testosterone in men.
The 2010 study he referencesLinks to an external site., published in the journal Pediatrics International, was conducted using the milk of pregnant cows. The scientists pulled from a pool of 18 people (seven men, six children, and five women), and found that milk reduced testosterone secretions—not overall testosterone—temporarily.
***
It is not logical to take a study of seven men who have temporary testosterone reduction and make the claim that cow’s milk “can increase estrogen and lower testosterone in men.”
***
The Avocado "Study"
The author makes a concession that Wilks is correct to criticize the biased beef industry for its fake and biased research, but then in the same breath, Wilks cites an avocado study that makes grand claims about avocados:
One of the studies The Game Changers cites repeatedly throughout the film is “Hass Avocado Modulates Postprandial Vascular Reactivity and Postprandial Inflammatory Responses To a Hamburger Meal In Healthy Volunteers.Links to an external site.”
Wilks uses this study to support his argument that meat impairs blood flow and increases inflammation. Except, that as you can probably guess, the study is “supported by the Hass Avocado Board.”
***
Bombard the Senses with Scientific Language
Another factor in argumentation is pathos--developing an emotional connection to your argument. The film tries to impress us with lots of scientific language, but it doesn’t add to much and too often the case, the scientific mumbo-jumbo is misleading. As the writer points out:
Numerous times throughout the documentary, The Game Changers bombards you with the scientific terms TMAO, hetereocyclic amines, heme iron, neu5gc (a doozy!), endotoxins, and AGEs.
Here, again, Wilks presents claims that these compounds, unique to animal products, increase the risk of inflammation, which can lead to a host of nasty diseases, particularly cancer.
Except that the scientific understanding of these compounds is far less studied than The Game Changers leads the viewer to believe. And the results of emerging studies are not nearly as concrete as those done on cigarettes, as the film later implies.
***
Exaggerated Claims
Another failure in ethos and logos is the exaggerated claims based on misinterpreted studies. Take the connection between processed meats and colorectal cancer. Kita writes:
“A person's lifetime absolute risk of developing colorectal cancer is about 5 percent. We also know that eating processed meats increases the risk of developing colorectal cancer,” says Brian St. Pierre., M.S., R.D., C.S.C.S., Director of Performance Nutrition at Precision NutritionLinks to an external site., a nutrition coaching company that has worked with the San Antonio Spurs, the Carolina Panthers, and thousands of non-athlete clients.
“In fact, eating 50 grams of processed meat daily (about one hot dog) increases the risk of developing colorectal cancer by 17 percent. Sounds scary. However, this increased risk is relative,” St. Pierre says.
In reality, actual risk goes up by about 1 percent total, to a new absolute risk of about 6 percent.
Sure, any increase in a risk of cancer isn’t good. But it’s not as bad as disinformation efforts can make it seem.
"These kind of misunderstandings (or intentional misleadings) make it easy for folks to be confused, or to misinterpret or misunderstand actual changes to risk," St. Pierre says. "It's not wrong, it's just often out of context."
"So, while it's true that the 'strength of the evidence' for the carcinogenicity of smoking is the same as processed meat. The 'degree of risk' is not even in the same sport, let alone the same ballpark," he says.
"What The Game Changers fails to mention is that though hetereocyclic amines seem to cause cancer, and the overall risk may be small, you can mitigate potential damage by marinating your meat with spices and acidic marinades (such as yogurt or vinegar-based marinades)," St. Pierre says.
"And by eating your meat with fruits and vegetables, all of which can significantly reduce your risk of HCAs.”
You could even go so far as to say "virtually eliminate your risk", as they can decrease HCA formation by up to 99 percent, says St. Pierre.
***
High-Performing Athletes Could Have Been Carnivores (Cherry-picking)
Kita points out that the film does an excellent job of creating pathos or emotional connection. They use “high-performing athletes” who are now eating a plant-based diet. But these anecdotal stories are not substitutes for real studies.
Plant-based eating is not the cause of their athleticism and fitness. It is correlated. These are genetic specimens who are mindful of what they eat and who train regularly. They could be just as impressive on a keto or some other diet.
We must distinguish causation from correlation.
Either/Or Fallacy: "You must make a choice"
Another problem is what’s called the Either/Or fallacy. Kita observes that you don’t have to be plant-based or meat-eater. You could be both, but the movie wants you to “make a choice.” In the words of Kita:
“Either you eat animal products and suffer the consequences or avoid animal products and thrive, the movie argues.
Except that there’s another choice: Eat more vegetables.
This is the choice that has vast and well-established scientific benefits.
This is the choice that qualified and experienced registered dietitians (of which none are featured in The Game Changers, by the way) urge their clients, professional athletes and regular people alike, to adopt.
This is a choice of inclusion, rather than exclusionLinks to an external site..
Around the half-hour mark, The Game Changers makes this claim: “Even iceberg lettuce has more antioxidants than salmon or eggs.”
It’s a statement that is so face-smackingly stupid, and it typifies the dangers of either/or eating.
By over-valuing one nutrient (antioxidants in iceberg lettuce), you devalue the host of beneficial nutrients in the other (heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids in salmon, brain-aiding choline in eggs—just to name two).
“Ultimately, it's not that getting people to eat plants is a bad thing. It's generally a great thing. But you don't have to do so by erroneously telling people that meat is killing them, and they need to go to an all-plant diet. That is a false dichotomy,” says St. Pierre.
“Instead, teach them the benefits of adding more wholesome plant foods to their meat intake. And then teach them to eat higher-quality meat options. Maybe even to consider swapping some meat for a plant-based protein (such as tempeh, tofu, or seitan). There's a progression, and a happy middle ground for most.”
***
Study of Layne Norton’s “The Game Changers Review--A Scientific Analysis (Updated)”
Layne Norton begins by explaining that he was skeptical about seeing The Game Changers because he’s seen several food documentaries that have been a pile of propaganda and BS.
He goes on to write that real documentaries--that is, credible ones--are science-based, examine opinions on both sides, and don’t twist and cherry-pick information to promote preconceived ideas.
Norton makes it clear early on that he’s no fan of The Game Changers. He says he won’t refer to it as a documentary but as a film because clearly, it doesn’t adhere to credible critical thinking principles to deserve being called a documentary.
The film would rather be “sexy” and scintillating than credible.
Another issue Norton has is that one of the producers, the great Arnold Schwarzenegger, ate a lot of meat during his bodybuilding years and then turns around “to espouse the virtues of a vegan diet.”
After being scolded by the vegan community for his skepticism, Norton decided to see the film. Here is the critique that follows:
Unlike the filmmakers, Norton discloses his biases: He’s not a vegan. His research in graduate school was sponsored by the Egg and Dairy Councils. He also points out that he is equally critical of meat-eating “low-carb zealots.”
The filmmakers do not disclose their conflicts of interest. They are either vegan or have money invested in vegan companies. Or both.
Furthermore, all the “experts” whose “studies” are used in the film sell vegan products.
Norton is skeptical that the film’s narrator MMA fighter James Wilks read 1,000 hours of studies about nutrition.
The Same Scholar Said Vegetarian Diets Can Make You Fat
The first “study” about gladiators is no study at all but a short article. Worse, the article is cherry-picked so that one scholar is ignored. This is the scholar who said that gladiators who ate a vegetarian high-carb diet were either fat or coated with a lot of adipose tissue. Being fat on a vegetarian diet is an inconvenient truth that doesn’t promote the film’s propaganda.
No One Said Protein Is Fuel
Then the film refutes the idea that protein is fuel for exercise, yet Norton points out that everyone stopped making this erroneous claim many years ago, so to bring it up is a Straw Man argument.
Bias Confirmation
The filmmakers seek out high-performance vegan athletes to confirm their bias when in fact there are far more omnivore athletes. The filmmakers are merely cherry-picking athletes to promote their propaganda.
What Is Bioavailable?
Norton continues to criticize the film’s false claim that plant protein and animal protein are the same. “That is a flat-out misrepresentation of scientific data,” Norton writes.
Plant proteins are less bioavailable, which means we don’t digest as high a percentage of plant protein as we do meat protein. They are only 10-40% as digestible as animal protein and they lack essential amino acids for optimal health and performance. You can combine plant proteins to improve the amino acid profile but you’re still getting less bioavailable protein.
Terrible Math
There are lame claims like a peanut butter sandwich at 8 grams of protein having as much protein as 3 eggs, 18 grams, or a 3-oz steak, which has 21 grams. Why even make the false claim?
Full Truth of Patrick Baboumian Not Disclosed
The film follows this lame claim by showing off powerlifter and strongman Patrick Baboumian. They don’t question if whether or not he’s on steroids or PEDs. Nor do they tell you he drinks 4 vegan protein shakes a day for 410 grams of protein. The film should disclose that if you’re going to get protein from a vegan diet, you will need to use vegan protein supplements to eat over 400 grams of protein when most people eat about 100 grams of protein a day.
Being a vegan would be less desirable if you were told you would have to eat 200-400 grams of protein a day to make sure you were digesting enough protein. The filmmakers hide this information.
Norton goes on to show the misleading representations of the Burrito and Beet Juice studies. I won’t go into the weeds here. Both studies were full of false and exaggerated claims and the claim that avocados improve endothelial function was funded by Hass Avocado Brand. Of course, the filmmakers didn’t disclose that.
The filmmakers blame meat for increased inflammation when in fact the true cause is obesity. They don’t show the link between obesity and inflammation because that would detract from their attempt to demonize meat.
Yet another aspect of propaganda is when the wife of a vegan NFL player makes “healthy” vegan dishes: chicken wings, mac and cheese, burgers, and cheesecake. These foods are calorie-dense, processed, full of canola oils, and agreed upon by the scientific community to be bad for you. In fact, vegan mac and cheese cause more inflammation than real cheese, but such truth would not promote the film’s propaganda.
Let’s Stop for a Moment
Let’s stop for a moment and say this: There is nothing wrong with promoting a plant-based diet based on the truth that you will need to take a lot of protein and other supplements to get adequate nutrition and you won’t be able to eat the “fun,” oil-larded processed vegan foods but rather eat whole foods. The point here isn’t to bash a plant-based diet. The point is to bash the dishonesty of propaganda that informs this film.
Let’s get back to the critique.
***
Norton then takes on the film’s claim that meat causes more CVD (cardiovascular disease) and cancer. Lean meat doesn’t do this and fatty fish lowers your CVD. The film doesn’t disclose this.
Faulty Comparison (another logical fallacy)
Norton then points out that the film makes a faulty comparison between humans and “vegan” gorillas. Our digestive tracts are different. Gorillas can absorb more vegan protein so the comparison is false, misleading, and dangerous.
Does a vegan diet help save the planet? Norton writes the following:
This might be the one compelling argument to limit meat consumption insofar as raising meat takes a disproportionate amount of land and water, but here again, the filmmakers misrepresent the truth about the impact of meat production on the environment. They claim that the emissions from meat are more than all of the total forms of transportation in the world combined. This is quite simply not true. Meat production accounts for about 3% of the USA’s greenhouse emissions (13-18% in less developed countries), while the energy industry at large is 80% of the greenhouse gases from the USA (64% worldwide). [63] Moreover,
Animal agriculture is responsible for 13–18% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and less in developed countries (e.g. 3% in the USA). Fossil fuel combustion for energy and transportation is responsible for approximately 64% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions globally, and more in developed countries (e.g. 80% in the USA)…The burning of fossil fuels for energy and animal agriculture are two of the biggest contributors to global warming, along with deforestation. Globally, fossil fuel-based energy is responsible for about 64% of human greenhouse gas emissions, with deforestation at about 18%, and animal agriculture between 13% and 18%. [64]
So before you admonish someone for eating meat and how bad it is for the environment, if you drive a muscle car but admonish others for eating meat because of how bad it is for the environment, you might want to look in the mirror.
Norton concludes:
In this case, the film used strawman, false dichotomies, cherry-picking, and a whole host of other logical fallacies in an attempt to demonize animal products and make a vegan diet the solution to the world’s problems. To be clear, I think a diet that is heavy in plants and fiber is great. I also have no problem with those who choose to not eat meat for their own ethical reasons, it’s not my job to judge your ethics. All I ask is that we are honest about what the science says. If you don’t want to eat meat because you don’t want to intentionally harm animals, that’s great. But do not twist scientific research and retroactively attempt to contort data so that it fits your bias.
I continue to be utterly disgusted by food ‘documentaries.’ As of yet, I have not seen one food film that is anything other than a steaming pile of ****. These are not documentaries. A documentary gives you experts from BOTH sides and then lets you draw your own conclusions. This film would be closest to a comedy, because it’s a joke. I didn’t even address all the ludicrous claims in the video, I simply picked out the most egregious claims. I would have needed to hire extra staff to fully debunk this steaming pile of dung. It helps no one and does not move veganism forward and will do nothing but further confuse the average person through misrepresentation of science and fear-mongering.
F-, we are all dumber for having watched this, and may God have mercy on your souls.
***
Thesis Samples for The Game Changers
Characteristics of an Effective Thesis
- Argumentative and debatable, not factual or obvious
- Generates reasons or mapping components, which outline the body paragraphs
- Sufficient specificity
- Presents a challenging inquiry
- Wow Factor
- Purpose
- Relevance
Examples
The Game Changers is bogus.
The Game Changers changed my life.
The Game Changers is amazing.
The Game Changers persuaded me to become a vegan.
The Game Changers is for fools.
The Game Changers is a mess.
I’m a big fan of The Game Changers.
Everyone should see The Game Changers.
The use of deception and manipulation in The Game Changers is justified because humans are too selfish and lazy to change through the powers of reason, humans need their vanity catered to by Alpha Male Bro Fantasies and we need to save animals from large-scale suffering.
While I concede that there is a level of deception and manipulation in the movie that diminishes its credibility, I defend its propaganda because the average person is so morally indifferent to the plight of animals and their own health that without the movie’s razzle-dazzle and phony emotional appeal, they would otherwise never develop an interest in something as undesirable and repellant as the thought of going on a vegan diet.
While I love The Game Changers’ message of good health, a robust environment, and mercy to the animals, the movie's flaws in terms of cherry-picked evidence, deliberate misinterpretations of data, faulty causation, conflicts of interest, and false claims about the supposed superiority of the vegan diet make the film a contemptible and laughable piece of third-rate propaganda.
McMahon made us watch a stupid movie called The Game Changers.
While I will concede that the vegan diet can be outright dangerous and create nutritional challenges that we do not face on an omnivore diet, The Game Changers has persuaded me to become a vegan in order to lessen my chances of suffering from arteriosclerosis, to be more mindful of eating whole foods and taking supplementation, to contribute to helping the planet, and to show mercy on the unspeakable suffering that animals face in order that we eat them.
I want to be like the healthy, athletic stars featured in The Game Changers, so I’ve decided to become a vegan.
***
Comma Splice Review
Comma Splices
A comma splice is joining two sentences with a comma when you should separate them with a period or a semicolon.
Incorrect
People love Facebook, however, they don't realize Facebook is sucking all of their energy.
Corrected
People love Facebook. However, they don't realize Facebook is sucking all of their energy.
Corrected
Though people love Facebook, they fail to realize Facebook is sucking all their energy.
Incorrect
Patience is difficult to cultivate, it grows steadily only if we make it a priority.
Corrected
Patience is difficult to cultivate. It grows steadily only if we make it a priority.
Corrected
Because patience grows within us so slowly, patience is extremely difficult to cultivate.
You can use a comma between two complete sentences when you join them with a FANBOYS word or coordinating conjunction (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so).
Correct
People love Facebook, but they don't realize Facebook is sucking all of their energy.
Student Comma Splices Part One (the second sentence feels like a continuation of thought from the first sentence, which it is, but it still requires a period before it)
- My department decided to set up another office for me to do my work, I was no longer sitting out front like the permanent receptionist.
- The permanent receptionist never spoke to anyone in the offices, he just answered phones.
- He said, “You have a few choices, they need a coordinator at the new jobsite or working the business side as a coordinator.”
- I was lucky, many opportunities came to me and now I had the required experience to get the job I wanted.
- There was no stopping me, all my achievements were completed on my own.
- I was promoted quickly, I went from coordinator to senior executive within a few months.
- The drug dealing lifestyle was insatiable to Jeff Henderson, he believed he could elude the feds.
- Our methods paralleled, my method was legal, his was illegal.
- Jeff Henderson rose to the top of his game, he had established his fortune.
10. Jeff Henderson had no choice, it was either work or stay confined in his prison cell.
11. She was going to marry her high school sweetheart, what better way to spend the rest of your life in bliss?
12. He asked me to marry him, he was a Marine after all stationed in Japan.
13. Her life was finally beginning, she could leave Los Angeles.
14. This was her life, she did what she wanted.
15. Now she had nothing, she had given up her job to move overseas.
16. Life was too much of a challenge, she accepted that fact.
To Avoid Comma Splices, Know the Difference Between Coordinating Conjunctions (FANBOYS) and Conjunctive Adverbs
Examples
Jerry ate ten pizzas a week. Nonetheless, he remained skinny.
Jerry ate ten pizzas a week, but he remained skinny.
Barbara didn't buy the BMW. Instead, she bought the Acura.
Barbara didn't buy the BMW, yet she did buy the Acura.
Steve wasn't interested in college. Moreover, he didn't want to work full-time.
Steve wasn't interested in college, and he didn't want to work full-time.
I don't want you to pay me back the hundred dollars you owe me. However, I do want you to help me do my taxes.
I don't want you to pay me back the hundred dollars you owe me, but I do want you to help me do my taxes.
I don't want you to pay me back the hundred dollars you owe me, but I do, however, want you to help me do my taxes.
I feel that our relationship has become stale, stagnant, and turgid. Consequently, I think we should break up.
I feel that our relationship has become stale, stagnant, and turgid, so I think we should break up.
Students hate reading. Therefore, they must be tested with closed-book reading exams.
Students hate reading, so they must be tested with closed-book reading exams.
Avoiding Comma Splices and Run-Ons
Fused (run-on) sentence
Klee's paintings seem simple, they are very sophisticated.
She doubted the value of medication she decided to try it once.
A fused sentence (also called a run-on) joins clauses that could each stand alone as a sentence with no punctuation or words to link them. Fused sentences must be either divided into separate sentences or joined by adding words or punctuation.
Comma Splice
I was strongly attracted to her, she was beautiful and funny.
We hated the meat loaf, the cafeteria served it every Friday.
A comma splice occurs when only a comma separates clauses that could each stand alone as a sentence. To correct a comma splice, you can insert a semicolon or period, connect the clauses with a word such as and or because, or restructure the sentence.
After each sentence, put a “C” for Correct or a “CS” for Comma Splice. If the sentence is a comma splice, rewrite it so that it is correct.
One. Bailey used to eat ten pizzas a day, now he eats a spinach salad for lunch and dinner.
Two. Marco no longer runs on the treadmill, instead he opts for the less injury-causing elliptical trainer.
Three. Running can cause shin splints, which can cause excruciating pain.
Four. Running in the incorrect form can wreak havoc on the knees, slowing down can often correct the problem.
Five. While we live in a society where 1,500-calorie cheeseburgers are on the rise, the reading of books, sad to say, is on the decline.
Six. Facebook is a haven for narcissists, it encourages showing off with selfies and other mundane activities that are ways of showing how great and amazing our lives our, what a sham.
Seven. We live in a society where more and more Americans are consuming 1,500-calorie cheeseburgers, however, those same Americans are reading less and less books.
Eight. Love is a virus from outer space, it tends to become most contagious during April and May.
Nine. The tarantula causes horror in many people, moreover there is a species of tarantula in Brazil, the wandering banana spider, that is the most venomous spider in the world.
Ten. Even though spiders cause many people to recoil with horror, most species are harmless.
Eleven. The high repair costs of European luxury vehicles repelled Amanda from buying such a car, instead she opted for a Japanese-made Lexus.
Twelve. Amanda got a job at the Lexus dealership, now she’s trying to get me a job in the same office.
Thirteen. While consuming several cinnamon buns, a twelve-egg cheese omelet, ten slices of French toast slathered in maple syrup, and a tray of Swedish loganberry crepes topped with a dollop of blueberry jam, I contemplated the very grave possibility that I might be eating my way to a heart attack.
Fourteen. Even though I rank marijuana far less dangerous than most pharmaceutical drugs, alcohol, and other commonly used intoxicants, I find marijuana unappealing for a host of reasons, not the least of which is its potential for radically degrading brain cells, its enormous effect on stimulating the appetite, resulting in obesity, and its capacity for over-relaxing many people so that they lose significant motivation to achieve their primary goals, opting instead for a life of sloth and intractable indolence.
Identify the Comma Splices Below:
It’s not a question of will there be chaos or will there be destruction, it’s a question of how much?
MySpace was disruptive in its time, however, it’s a dated platform and to simply mention it is to make people laugh with a certain derision surely it’s a platform that has seen its time, another example is the meal replacement Soylent, its creator made a drink that says, “You’re too busy to eat,” so drinking this pancake batter-like concoction gives tech people street. I may laugh at its stupidity, instead I should admire it since the product has made millions for its creator. It’s proven to be somewhat disruptive.
To be sure, though, Facebook redefines the word disruptive, it has rapidly accrued over 3 billion users and will soon have half the planet plugged into its site, that is the apotheosis of a greedy person’s fantasy, imagine controlling half the planet on a platform that mines private information and targets ads toward specific personality profiles.
One of the scary disruptions of Facebook is that billions of people have lost their personal agency, what that means that people have unknowingly been manipulated by Facebook’s puppeteers to the point that many Facebook users suffer from social media addiction, moreover, these same users prefer the fake life they curate on social media to the real life they once had, in fact, their previous real life is just a puff of smoke that has faded into the distance, many people no longer even know what it means to be “real” anymore, having lost their agency, having succumbed to their Facebook addiction, they have become zombies waiting for their next rush of social media-fueled dopamine, what a sad state of affairs.
Comments