Lesson Plan Über Alles

Replace veggie burger essay in 1C with “Cream” by Haruki Murakami.

Replace veggie burger essay in 1C with “Cream” by Haruki Murakami.

Spring 2020 Remainder Semester Schedule for Both 1C and 1A

Here is 1C Schedule for remainder of Spring 2020:

 

Essay #2 (1,000 words)

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 Yoni Appelbaum’s essay “How America Ends” and develop an argumentative thesis about the role of massive demographic shifts on American democracy. 

Choice D

Read Derek Thompson’s essay “Workism Is Making Americans Miserable” and develop a thesis that supports or refutes Thompson’s claim that work has become a false religion that doesn’t deliver on its promises. 

Choice E

Read "Should the Government Give Everyone $1,000 a Month?" by Spencer Bokat-Lindell in The New York Times and develop a thesis that argues for or against UBI as a viable solution to the crisis of mass unemployment. 

 

Essay 3 (1,000 words)

Minimum of 2 sources for your MLA Works Cited page.

Choice A

Read New Yorker writer Joshua Yaffa’s essay “The Kremlin’s Creative Director: How the television producer Konstantin Ernst went from discerning auteur to Putin’s unofficial minister of propaganda” and develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the role of media in producing a new type of “postmodern propaganda” that shatters critical thinking. 

Choice B

Read the online essay "It's been hot before" and write an argumentative essay about the role of  logical fallacies in the dangerous denial of global warming and global drought. For another source, you can use Netflix Explained, "The World's Water Crisis."

Choice C

In the context of Jasmin Barmore’s essay “The Queen of Eating Shellfish Online,” develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the alleged benefits of mukbang, the glorification of binge-eating on a webcam. In your essay, address the lonely factor by reading Read Judith Shulevitz’s essay “Why You Never See Your Friends Anymore,” and use the essay to support or refute the contention that mukbang addresses the depression and anxiety of loneliness.  

Choice D

Read “The Coddling of the American Mind” and “Have Smartphones Ruined a Generation?” and develop an argument about the authors’ claim that a “coddling culture” is creating a generation of dysfunctional people. 

Essay 4 (1,000 words)

You need 3 sources for Works Cited

Option A

Read Allison Arieff’s “Cars Are Death Machines. Self-Driving Tech Won’t Change That” and support or refute her contention that self-driving cars are not the solution to traffic dangers. 

Choice B 

Read "It's Time to Confront the Threat of Right-Wing Terrorism" by John Cassidy in The New Yorker and "Does the banning of Alex Jones signal a new era of big tech responsibility?" by Julia Carrie Wong and Olivia Solon in The Guardian and agree or disagree with the claim that big tech companies are morally obliged to censor right-wing white nationalist trolls such as Alex Jones. For another source, you can also use “Free Speech Scholars to Alex Jones: You’re Not Protected” by Alan Feuer. 

Choice C

Read Alexandra Sifferlin's "The Weight Loss Trap" and Harriet Brown's "The Weight of the Evidence" and develop an argumentative thesis that addresses their claim that losing weight is a nearly futile quest. 

Choice D

Read Andrew Marant’s “Free Speech Is Killing Us” and support or refute his claim that free speech does not apply to private companies.

Choice E

Read Spencer Bokat-Lindell’s “Do We Need to Break Up Facebook?” and develop an argumentative thesis that addresses some people’s claim that Facebook has gotten too big and should be divided into smaller parts. 

Choice F

Read “What Women Know About the Internet” by Emily Chang and agree or disagree with the author’s contention that regulations are more important than free speech for protecting women. 

Choice G

Read the following: “Speaking Ill of Hugh Hefner,” “Why Hugh Hefner’s Haters Won’t Let Him Rest in Peace,” “Negative Obituaries Prove Hugh Hefner Was Right,” and 10-minute video Maher vs. Douthat. Then develop an argumentative thesis that addresses this question: Was Hefner a warrior for equal rights, free speech, and higher culture, or was he a selfish, salacious Peter Pan who denigrated women? Or a bit of both?

Choice H

Read Conor Friedersdorf’s “In Defense of Harvey Weinstein’s Harvard Lawyer” and agree or disagree with the contention that representing someone as monstrous and diabolical as Harvey Weinstein performs a civic good. 

Choice I

In the context of Peter Pomeranstsev’s online essay “Russia and the Menace of Unreality,” address the claim that the “mass hallucination” of misinformation is at war with the powers of democracy in the United States and abroad. Also see David Roberts address “tribal epistemology.” 

March 24 Go over Derek Thompson’s notion of “Workism.” Homework #8 is to read "Should the Government Give Everyone $1,000 a Month?" by Spencer Bokat-Lindell and in 200 words explain the pros and cons of UBI. 

March 26 Go over the UBI debate. We will grade Portfolio #1, based on responses 1-8. 

March 31 Chromebook In-Class Objective: Write first half of your essay.   

April 2 Chromebook In-Class Objective: Write second half of your essay. 

April 7 Essay 2 due on turnitin. We will read the online essay "It's been hot before" and discuss an argumentative essay about the role of logical fallacies in the dangerous denial of global warming and global drought. For another source, you can use Netflix Explained, "The World's Water Crisis." Homework #9 is to read Jasmin Barmore’s essay “The Queen of Eating Shellfish Online” and Judith Shulevitz’s essay “Why You Never See Your Friends Anymore,” and use the essay to support or refute the contention that mukbang addresses the depression and anxiety of loneliness. 

April 9 Go over “The Queen of Eating Shellfish Online” and “Why You Never See Your Friends Anymore.” Homework #10 is to read Read “The Coddling of the American Mind” and in 200 words explain how some colleges are cultivating dysfunctional students. 

April 21 Go over “The Coddling of the American Mind.” Homework #11 is to read “Have Smartphones Ruined a Generation?” and explain in 200 words how smartphones are part of a coddling culture that is impeding the emotional growth of young people. 

April 23 Go over “Have Smartphones Ruined a Generation.”

April 28 Chromebook Objective: Write first half of your essay. 

April 30 Chromebook Objective: Write second half of your essay. 

May 5 Essay 3 due on turnitin. We will ead Allison Arieff’s “Cars Are Death Machines. Self-Driving Tech Won’t Change That” and support or refute her contention that self-driving cars are not the solution to traffic dangers. Homework #12: Read "It's Time to Confront the Threat of Right-Wing Terrorism" by John Cassidy in The New Yorker and "Does the banning of Alex Jones signal a new era of big tech responsibility?" by Julia Carrie Wong and Olivia Solon in The Guardian and in 200 words agree or disagree with the claim that big tech companies are morally obliged to censor right-wing white nationalist trolls such as Alex Jones.

May 7 Go over the Alex Jones controversy. Homework #13: Read Alexandra Sifferlin's "The Weight Loss Trap" and in 200 words explain why it is so difficult to lose weight and keep it off. 

May 12 We go over Harriet Brown's "The Weight of the Evidence." We will see Netflix Explained on this subject of weight loss. Homework #14: Read Andrew Marantz’s “Free Speech Is Killing Us” and in 200 words agree or disagree with his position that free speech doesn’t apply to private companies. 

May 14 Go over “Free Speech Is Killing Us.” Homework #15: Read Spencer Bokat-Lindell’s “Do We Need to Break Up Facebook?” and in 200 words explain the pros and cons of breaking up this huge social media company. 

May 19 Go over “Do We Need to Break Up Facebook?” Homework #16: Read “What Women Know About the Internet” by Emily Chang and in 200 words agree or disagree with the author’s contention that regulations are more important than free speech for protecting women. 

May 21 Go over Emily Chang. Homework #17: Read “Speaking Ill of Hugh Hefner,” “Why Hugh Hefner’s Haters Won’t Let Him Rest in Peace,” “Negative Obituaries Prove Hugh Hefner Was Right” and then explain in 200 words why Hugh Hefner is such a controversial figure. 

May 26 We will examine the Hugh Hefner debate: Was Hefner a warrior for equal rights, free speech, and culture, or was he a selfish, salacious Peter Pan who denigrated women? Or a bit of both? We will study the following: “Speaking Ill of Hugh Hefner,” “Why Hugh Hefner’s Haters Won’t Let Him Rest in Peace,” “Negative Obituaries Prove Hugh Hefner Was Right,” and 10-minute video Maher vs. Douthat. Your homework #18 for next class: Read Conor Friedersdorf’s “In Defense of Harvey Weinstein’s Harvard Lawyer” and in 200 words agree or disagree with the contention that representing someone as monstrous and diabolical as Harvey Weinstein performs a civic good. 

May 28 Go over Conor Friedersdorf’s “In Defense of Harvey Weinstein’s Harvard Lawyer” and agree or disagree with the contention that representing someone as monstrous and diabolical as Harvey Weinstein performs a civic good. Your homework #19 is to read Peter Pomeranstsev’s online essay “Russia and the Menace of Unreality,” and in 200 words address the claim that the “mass hallucination” of misinformation is at war with the powers of democracy in the United States and abroad. 

June 2 We will cover “Russia and the Menace of Unreality.”

June 4 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write first half of your essay.

June 9 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write last third of your essay.

June 11 Essay 4 Due on turnitin. We will grade Portfolio Part 2.

Here is 1A Schedule for remainder of Spring 2020:

 

Essay Assignment 3 due April 27. Be sure to have a minimum of 2 sources and an MLA Works Cited page. 

Option A:

In a 1,000-word essay, compare Dr. David Pilgrim’s Jim Crow Museum explanation of Jim Crow laws of yesterday to Childish Gambino’s exploration in “This Is America” to Jim Crow exploitation today. You may consult “Hidden Meanings” video, Dr. Lori Brooks’ Hidden Meanings video, “Childish Gambino’s Genius Absurdity,” and PBS analysis. Your claim will be to address the argument that Jim Crow still exists or not today. 

Option B

In the context of the John Oliver Confederate Flag critique video, defend or refute Oliver’s claim that Civil War figures should not be memorialized in the public square but relegated to museums and history books. For research sources, consult Jamelle Bouie’s “Remembering History as Fable” and Jack Schwartz’s “It’s Time for the Lost Cause to Get Lost.”

Option C

Read bell hooks’ essay “Learning in the Shadow of Race and Class” and “Keeping Close to Home” and develop an argumentative thesis about hooks’ contention that social class can be an impediment to climbing the educational ladder.  

Option D 

Read Rachel Monroe’s essay “When GoFundMe Gets Ugly” and develop an argumentative claim that supports or refutes Monroe’s claim that the appeal of GoFundMe is based on an over simplistic narrative that conceals unsavory contradictions and complexities. 

Essay Assignment 4 due May 18. Be sure to have at least 2 sources and an MLA Works Cited page.  

Option A

See Monica Lewinsky Ted Talk video “The Price of Shame” and John Oliver video on “Public Shaming” and develop an argumentative thesis about what type of shaming is good for society and what kind of shaming cannot be defended. Consult Conor Friedersdorf essay “John Oliver’s Weak Case for Callout Culture.”

Option B

Read Kajsa Elas Ekman’s essay “All surrogacy is exploitation” and write an argumentative thesis that supports or refutes her claim. 

Option C

Develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the human inclination for staying within the tribe of sameness as explained in David Brooks’ “People Like Us.” Consult Vice video about social media and tribalism; also consult Brian Klaas video on how tribalism in social media is undermining democracy. Also consult the role of Backfire Effect and tribalism. 

Option D

Develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the claim that community college should be free. Be sure to have a counterargument section.  For research, use Rahm Emanuel’s “A Simple Proposition to Revive the American Dream” and Jay Mathews’ “Maybe tuition-free community college comes at too high a price” and any other credible sources. 

Default Setting Essay Template for 1,000-word essay 

8 Paragraphs, 130 words per paragraph, approx. 1,000 words (1,040 to be exact)

Paragraph 1: Attention-getting introduction

Paragraph 2: Transition from introduction to argumentative claim (thesis)

Paragraphs 3-5: Body paragraphs that give reasons for supporting your claim.

Paragraphs 6 & 7: Counterarguments in which you anticipate how your opponents will disagree with you, and you then provide rebuttals to those counterarguments.

Paragraph 8: Conclusion, an emotionally powerful re-statement of your thesis.

Make sure to include a Works Cited page. 

Essay #5 Due June 10.

You need 5 credible sources for the MLA Works Cited page in your final capstone essay.

Your guidelines for your Final Research Paper are as follows:

This research paper should present a thesis that is specific, manageable, provable, and contestable—in other words, the thesis should offer a clear position, stand, or opinion that will be proven with research.   

You should analyze and prove your thesis using examples and quotes from a variety of sources.   

You need to research and cite from at least five sources.  You must use at least 3 different types of sources.

At least one source must be from an ECC library database.    

At least one source must be a book, anthology or textbook.    

At least one source must be from a credible website, appropriate for academic use.  

The paper should not over-rely on one main source for most of the information. Rather, it should use multiple sources and synthesize the information found in them.

This paper will be approximately 5-7 pages in length, not including the Works Cited page, which is also required.  This means at least 5 full pages of text. The Works Cited page does NOT count towards length requirement.

You must use MLA format for the document, in-text citations, and Works Cited page.   

You must integrate quotations and paraphrases using signal phrases and analysis or commentary.  

You must sustain your argument, use transitions effectively, and use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

Your paper must be logically organized and focused.   

Default Setting Essay Template for 1,200-word essay 

9 Paragraphs, 135 words per paragraph, approx. 1,200 words (1,215 to be exact)

Paragraph 1: Attention-getting introduction

Paragraph 2: Transition from introduction to argumentative claim (thesis)

Paragraphs 3-6: Body paragraphs that give reasons for supporting your claim.

Paragraphs 7 & 8: Counterarguments in which you anticipate how your opponents will disagree with you, and you then provide rebuttals to those counterarguments.

Paragraph 9: Conclusion, an emotionally powerful re-statement of your thesis.

Make sure to include a Works Cited page.

Final Essay #5 for 1,200 words

Option A

In context of Alfie Kohn’s “From Degrading to De-Grading,” support, refute, or complicate Alfie Kohn’s assertion that grading is an inferior education tool that all conscientious teachers should abandon. In other words, will students benefit from an accountability-free education? Why? Explain. 

Option B

Develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. Consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate,  John Oliver video on vaccinations. See Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” See New York Times logical fallacies video. Also see "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem." 

Option C

See video “3 Arguments Why Marijuana Should Stay Illegal” and read Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts” and support, refute, or complicate the argument that legalizing weed is a bad idea. See Netflix documentary Grass Is Greener.

Option D

Develop a claim that supports or refutes the claim that vaping dangers have reached a level that compels individuals to quit using all vaping products. Or you can argue for an outright ban. Or you can argue for raising the legal age limit. Consult "The Actual Harms of Vaping" by James Hamblin, "Have We Hit Peak Vape Panic?" by Spencer Bokat-Lindell, "Vaping Illnesses: Tracking the Outbreak" by Jonathan Corum, "Is It Time to Quit Vaping?" by Karen Zroick and Jacey Fortin, "The Promise of Vaping and the Rise of Juul" by Jia Tolentino,  "Student vaping epidemic has California schools frantically mobilizing" by Howard Blume, Sonali Kohli, and NIna Agrawal. 

March 30 Essay 2 due on turnitin.  We will compare Dr. David Pilgrim’s Jim Crow Museum explanation of Jim Crow laws of yesterday to Childish Gambino’s exploration in “This Is America” to Jim Crow exploitation today. You may consult “Hidden Meanings” video, Dr. Lori Brooks’ Hidden Meanings video, “Childish Gambino’s Genius Absurdity,” and PBS analysis. Homework #10: Read Jack Schwartz’s “It’s Time for the Lost Cause to Get Lost” and in 200-word paragraph explain how some people rewrite the history of slavery.

April 1 Go over Jamelle Bouie’s “Remembering History as Fable” and Jack Schwartz’s “It’s Time for the Lost Cause to Get Lost.” We will watch John Oliver’s video about Confederate statues. Your Homework #11 is to read bell hooks’ essay “Learning in the Shadow of Race and Class” and “Keeping Close to Home” and develop an argumentative 200-word paragraph about hooks’ contention that social class can be an impediment to climbing the educational ladder.

April 6: We will go over bell hooks’ essay “Learning in the Shadow of Race and Class” and “Keeping Close to Home” and develop an argumentative thesis about hooks’ contention that social class can be an impediment to climbing the educational ladder. Homework #12 is to read Rachel Monroe’s “When GoFundMe Gets Ugly” and explain why this fund-raising campaign has a dark side. 

April 8: We will go over Rachel Monroe’s “When GoFundMe Gets Ugly.” We will grade Portfolio Part #1, which should include 12 typed homework assignments. Homework #13: Read P1 Commas and take the 10 tests, report your scores, and explain your confidence level. 

April 20 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write an introduction, thesis, and two supporting paragraphs. Homework #13 is due next class. 

April 22 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write supporting paragraphs, counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, Works Cited page. Homework #13 on commas is due.

April 27 Essay #3 due on turnitin. See Monica Lewinsky Ted Talk video “The Price of Shame” and John Oliver video on “Public Shaming” and develop an argumentative thesis about what type of shaming is good for society and what kind of shaming cannot be defended.Homework #14: Read Kajsa Elas Ekman’s essay “All surrogacy is exploitation” and in 200 words explain why surrogacy should be banned. 

April 29 Will will go over surrogacy debate. Homework #15:  Read David Brooks’ Atlantic essay “People Like Us” and explain why we gravitate people who share our values. 

May 4 We will go over “People Like Us” and watch two videos about social media and tribalism from Vice News and Brian Klaas. If we have time, we will go over surrogacy essay topic. Homework #16: Write 200-word paragraph that explains the free community college debate covered by Rahm Emanuel’s “A Simple Proposition to Revive the American Dream” and Jay Mathews’ “Maybe tuition-free community college comes at too high a price.” 

May 6  Go over free community college debate. Your homework #17 for next class is to read Harlan Coben’s argument from “The Undercover Parent” and in 200 words argue if spyware is a reasonable and compelling safety measure that parents may need to use for their children’s computers. Homework #18 is to read P-2 Semicolons and take the practice tests. Explain your confidence in using semicolons. 

May 11 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write first half of your essay. Go over Homework #18. Your Homework #19: Read P-5 Quotation Marks, take the 5 Practice Tests, report your scores, and explain your confidence level. 

May 13 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write second half of your essay. Go over Homework #19. 

May 18 Essay 4 Due on Turnitin. November 6 Go over the crisis that anti-vaxxers represent to reason and science. We will develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. Consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate,  John Oliver video on vaccinations. See Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” See New York Times logical fallacies video. Also see "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem." If time, we will read Alfie Kohn’s “From Degrading to De-Grading” and go over how Kohn supports his claim that grades are bad for education. Homework #20 is to read Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts” and in a 200-word paragraph  support, refute, or complicate the argument that legalizing weed is a bad idea.May 20 We will see video “3 Arguments Why Marijuana Should Stay Illegal” and go over Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts. See NYT editorial “Marijuana Damages Young Brains.” If we have time, we will also see Netflix documentary The Grass Is Greener. Homework #21 is to read "The Actual Harms of Vaping" by James Hamblin and "Have We Hit Peak Vape Panic?" by Spencer Bokat-Lindell and explain why some are arguing for a ban on all vaping products. 

May 25 Veteran’s Day Holiday

May 27 We will cover the following: "The Actual Harms of Vaping" by James Hamblin, "Have We Hit Peak Vape Panic?" by Spencer Bokat-Lindell, "Vaping Illnesses: Tracking the Outbreak" by Jonathan Corum, "Is It Time to Quit Vaping?" by Karen Zroick and Jacey Fortin, "The Promise of Vaping and the Rise of Juul" by Jia Tolentino,  "Student vaping epidemic has California schools frantically mobilizing" by Howard Blume, Sonali Kohli, and NIna Agrawal. The following videos should be helpful: "Why Vaping Is Bad for You," "Researchers Looking for Vape-Related Illnesses," and "Dissecting the Vaping Illness Mystery." Homework #22: Read P-6 Pronouns, take the 7 tests and report your scores before explaining your confidence level. 

June 1 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write first third of your essay.

June 3 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write second third of your essay. We will go over Homework #22. 

June 8 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write final third of your essay.

June 10 Essay 5 Due on turnitin and turn in Portfolio Part 2  (13-22)

1A Agenda 3-18-20: Delete Your Social Media, Lesson 4

Essay Assignment 2 due on March 30 with 2 sources for Works Cited:

For a 1,000-word essay, develop an argumentative thesis that addresses Jaron Lanier (Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now) that social media compromises personal excellence, degrades one’s core humanity, and accelerates the disintegration of democracy. You may also consult Black Mirror episode “Nosedive,” Sherry Turkle’s Ted Talk “Connected, But Alone,” and Tristan Harris’ Ted Talk video “How a Handful of Tech Companies Control Billions of Minds Everyday.” Also consult these works from Tristan Harris: “Our Minds Have Been Hijacked by Our Phones,” and “How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds. You can also use Andrew Sullivan’s and “I Used to be a Human Being” and any other credible source.  

March 9 Essay 1 Due on turnitin. Go over Andrew Sullivan’s “I Used to be a Human Being,” Sherry Turkle, and Tristan Harris. Watch “Nosedive.” Homework #5 for March 11: Read Lanier pages 1-39 and in 200-word paragraph explain how social media destroys free will.

March 11 Go over Lanier 1-39. Homework #6 for March 16: Read pages 39-76 and in a 200-word paragraph explain how social media makes us terrible versions of ourselves.

March 16 Go over Lanier 39-76. Homework #7 for March 18: Read Lanier 76-145 and in 200-word paragraph, explain the pathological effects of BUMMER. 

March 18 Go over Lanier 76-145. Homework #8: Read S-7 Parallelism and define parallelism and take the 2 Practice tests and record your scores before explaining how confident you are no in using parallel structure in future essays. 

March 23 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write an introduction, thesis, and two supporting paragraphs. Go over parallelism. Homework #9: Read S-8 Coordination, Subordination and explain the use of coordination and subordination in writing sentences. Take the 2 Practice tests, report your scores, and explain your confidence level. 

March 25 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write supporting paragraphs, counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, Works Cited page. Go over Homework #9. 

March 30 Essay 2 due on turnitin.

Writing Strategy:

Introduction Paragraph 1:

Summarize Lacey's "nosedive" in the "Nosedive" episode of Black Mirror. 

Or summarize Andrew Sullivan's "nosedive" in his essay "I Used to be Human Being."

Or summarize the "nosedive" of someone you know who got addicted to social media. 

Or summarize social media addiction as described in any Tristan Harris or Sherry Turkle video of your choosing. 

Or summarize Jaron Lanier's central argument in his book. 

Thesis Paragraph 2:

Agree or disagree with the claim that we should delete our social media accounts based on the following evidence:

One. Social media is an addiction trap by design that hijacks our brains. 

Two. Social media brings forth our worst version of ourselves. 

Three. Social media encourages tribalism and alternative realities.

Four. Social media spreads weaponized misinformation.

Five. In its "race to the bottom" to get clickbait, social media erodes liberal democracies around the world. 

Six. Social media encourages us to give up our private data until we have submitted all our privacy, and this surrender will result to a loss of individual rights and freedoms. 

Paragraphs 3-6

Choose 4 of the above points to address in your body paragraphs. 

Counterargument-Rebuttal Paragraph 7

Find a defense of social media and write a rebuttal of it. 

Here are some common counterarguments:

"No one is holding a gun to your head and saying you need to be on social media."

"Social media has connected me to family and friends in ways that otherwise would be impossible."

"You show me extreme cases, but for every pathological social media addict I can show you dozens of well-adjusted mentally healthy people who use social media."

Conclusion Paragraph 8

Write an emotionally powerful restatement of your thesis. 

McMahon’s “Secret” Refutation Essay Outline

Paragraph 1: Summarize Tristan Harris’ YouTube video “How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds everyday,” and address the power of the few over the many; the race to the bottom, the outrage machine making clicks, the loss of free agency (free will), the destruction of democracy, the addiction that is baked in the social media landscape, the attention economy, etc. 

Paragraph 2: Pivot to Jaron Lanier’s claim that we should delete our social media accounts and then argue that deleting one’s account isn’t the solution and provide reasons for your thesis. These reasons will be your supporting paragraphs. 

Some reasons I covered in class:

One. Only mindful people will delete their accounts. This won’t be a game-changer because the majority “Homer Simpsons” won’t heed Harris’ or Lanier’s warnings. 

Two. Saying that something is addicting so it should be eliminated from our life is a weak argument. Lots of things are addicting: TV, German chocolate cake, wine, relationships, etc. Moderation, not abstinence, is the more reasonable response. 

Three. Disciplined use of social media can be valuable for business, communicating with loved ones who are far away, engaging in meaningful political causes, etc. 

Four. Reducing one’s social media by over 90% is probably reasonable. 

Five. Time-blocking one’s day is more reasonable than deleting all of one’s social media accounts. 

Six. One should have a healthy contempt for social media because the diagnosis of its vileness by Harris and Lanier is accurate, but a healthy contempt doesn’t necessarily translate into deleting one’s accounts. As said earlier, a 90% reduction or more is more reasonable unless you’re hopelessly addicted. 

Notice there is no counterargument-rebuttal because the WHOLE essay is a counterargument-rebuttal. This is called a refutation essay.

Conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis. 

Writing Strategy:

Introduction Paragraph 1:

Summarize Lacey's "nosedive" in the "Nosedive" episode of Black Mirror. 

Or summarize Andrew Sullivan's "nosedive" in his essay "I Used to be Human Being."

Or summarize the "nosedive" of someone you know who got addicted to social media. 

Or summarize social media addiction as described in any Tristan Harris or Sherry Turkle video of your choosing. 

Or summarize Jaron Lanier's central argument in his book. 

Thesis Paragraph 2:

Argue that Jaron Lanier has made a persuasive case that the existence of "BUMMER" in social media compels us to at the very least delete our social media use by 90% or outright eliminate it. 

Paragraph 3:

Paragraph 3 based on your first Lanier homework assignment: Read Lanier pages 1-39 and in 200-word paragraph explain how social media destroys free will.

Paragraph 4:

Paragraph 4 based on your second homework assignment: Read pages 39-76 and in a 200-word paragraph explain how social media makes us terrible versions of ourselves. Lanier is referring to the "A Factor."

Paragraph 5: Another characteristic of BUMMER.

Paragraph 6: Another characteristic of BUMMER. 

Paragraph 7: Counterargument-Rebuttal

Here are some common counterarguments:

"No one is holding a gun to your head and saying you need to be on social media."

"Social media has connected me to family and friends in ways that otherwise would be impossible."

"You show me extreme cases, but for every pathological social media addict I can show you dozens of well-adjusted mentally healthy people who use social media."

Conclusion Paragraph 8

Write an emotionally powerful restatement of your thesis. 

McMahon’s “Secret” Refutation Essay Outline

Agree or disagree with the claim that we should delete our social media accounts based on the following evidence:

One. Social media is an addiction trap by design that hijacks our brains. 

Two. Social media brings forth our worst version of ourselves. 

Three. Social media encourages tribalism and alternative realities.

Four. Social media spreads weaponized misinformation.

Five. In its "race to the bottom" to get clickbait, social media erodes liberal democracies around the world. 

Six. Social media encourages us to give up our private data until we have submitted all our privacy, and this surrender will result to a loss of individual rights and freedoms. 

Paragraphs 3-6

Choose 4 of the above points to address in your body paragraphs. 

Counterargument-Rebuttal Paragraph 7

Find a defense of social media and write a rebuttal of it. 

Here are some common counterarguments:

"No one is holding a gun to your head and saying you need to be on social media."

"Social media has connected me to family and friends in ways that otherwise would be impossible."

"You show me extreme cases, but for every pathological social media addict I can show you dozens of well-adjusted mentally healthy people who use social media."

Conclusion Paragraph 8

Write an emotionally powerful restatement of your thesis. 

McMahon’s “Secret” Refutation Essay Outline

Paragraph 1: Summarize Tristan Harris’ YouTube video “How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds everyday,” and address the power of the few over the many; the race to the bottom, the outrage machine making clicks, the loss of free agency (free will), the destruction of democracy, the addiction that is baked in the social media landscape, the attention economy, etc. 

Paragraph 2: Pivot to Jaron Lanier’s claim that we should delete our social media accounts and then argue that deleting one’s account isn’t the solution and provide reasons for your thesis. These reasons will be your supporting paragraphs. 

Some reasons I covered in class:

One. Only mindful people will delete their accounts. This won’t be a game-changer because the majority “Homer Simpsons” won’t heed Harris’ or Lanier’s warnings. 

Two. Saying that something is addicting so it should be eliminated from our life is a weak argument. Lots of things are addicting: TV, German chocolate cake, wine, relationships, etc. Moderation, not abstinence, is the more reasonable response. 

Three. Disciplined use of social media can be valuable for business, communicating with loved ones who are far away, engaging in meaningful political causes, etc. 

Four. Reducing one’s social media by over 90% is probably reasonable. 

Five. Time-blocking one’s day is more reasonable than deleting all of one’s social media accounts. 

Six. One should have a healthy contempt for social media because the diagnosis of its vileness by Harris and Lanier is accurate, but a healthy contempt doesn’t necessarily translate into deleting one’s accounts. As said earlier, a 90% reduction or more is more reasonable unless you’re hopelessly addicted. 

Notice there is no counterargument-rebuttal because the WHOLE essay is a counterargument-rebuttal. This is called a refutation essay.

Conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis. 

 

Overview of the Essay Topic

How does social media in the smartphone age hijack our freedom and autonomy and work against our best interests?

The following should be considered for your body paragraphs (mapping components of a thesis):

One. Social media is now a portable crack machine that puts us inside a dopamine feedback loop resulting in a gradual behavior modification and addiction that can entrap even the smartest, most disciplined individuals because the addictive nature of social media is not a bug; it's a feature. Social media exists so that we give up our autonomy. 

Two. When we are addicted to anything, including social media's intermittent rewards, we become a nastier, meaner, dumber version of ourselves. 

Three. Because we are tribalists, we are vulnerable to social anxiety and social status as it pertains to our social media interactions. Long-term social media immersion results in anxiety and eventually into acute depression. 

Four. Not only do we become addicted; our addiction makes us willing participants in our own submission to data mining so that we are the product of the social media companies who sell our most private date to other business entities without our knowledge and consent. 

Five. Social media by its very nature tends toward fakery, manipulation, propaganda, and "fake news" because in grabbing attention from the reptilian part of our brains, social media is in a "race to the bottom" to get outrage. This sense of outrage is essential for maximizing clickbait and revenue for the social media companies. 

Six. As we adapt to the "race to the bottom," we become more polarized as a society and this polarization degrades democracy while strengthening fascism and totalitarianism.

Facebook and Google. The more a company uses BUMMER the more it attracts trolls like Russian operatives trying to destroy democracies around the world.

 

BUMMER is reviewed in The Guardian. Excerpt:

A is for Attention acquisition

People often get weird and nasty online. This bizarre phenomenon surprised everyone in the earliest days of networking, and it has had a profound effect on our world. Nastiness also turned out to be like crude oil for the social media companies and other behaviour manipulation empires that quickly came to dominate the internet, because it fuelled negative behavioural feedback.

Why does the nastiness happen? In brief: ordinary people are brought together in a setting in which the main – or often the only – reward that’s available is attention.

With nothing else to seek but attention, people tend to become assholes, because the biggest ones get the most attention. This inherent bias toward assholedom flavours the action of all the other parts of the Bummer machine.

B is for Butting into everyone’s lives

Everyone has been placed under a level of surveillance straight out of a dystopian science fiction novel.

Spying is accomplished mostly through connected personal devices – especially, for now, smartphones – that people keep practically glued to their bodies. Data is gathered about each person’s communications, interests, movements, contact with others, emotional reactions to circumstances, facial expressions, purchases, vital signs: an ever-growing, boundless variety of data.

Algorithms correlate data from each person and between people. The correlations are effectively theories about the nature of each person, and those theories are constantly measured and rated for how predictive they are. Like all well-managed theories, they improve through adaptive feedback.

C is for Cramming content down your throat

Algorithms choose what each person experiences through their devices. This component might be called a feed, a recommendation engine, or personalisation. It means each person sees different things. The immediate motivation is to deliver stimuli for individualised behaviour modification.

Not all personalisation is part of Bummer. When Netflix recommends a movie or eBay recommends something to buy, it isn’t Bummer. It only becomes Bummer in connection with other components. Neither Netflix nor eBay is being paid by third parties to influence your behaviour apart from the immediate business you do with each site.

D is for Directing behaviours in the sneakiest way possible

The above elements are connected to create a measurement and feedback machine that deliberately modifies behaviour. The process runs thus: customised feeds become optimised to “engage” each user, often with emotionally potent cues, leading to addiction. People don’t realise how they are being manipulated. The default purpose of manipulation is to get people more and more glued in, and to get them to spend more and more time in the system. But other purposes for manipulation are also tested.

For instance, if you’re reading on a device, your reading behaviours will be correlated with those of multitudes of other people. If someone who has a reading pattern similar to yours bought something after it was pitched in a particular way, then the odds become higher that you will get the same pitch. You might be targeted before an election with weird posts that have been proven to bring out the inner cynic in people who are similar to you, in order to reduce the chances that you’ll vote.

Bummer platforms have proudly reported on experimenting with making people sad, changing voter turnout, and reinforcing brand loyalty. Indeed, these are some of the best-known examples of research that were revealed in the formative days of Bummer. The digital network approach to behaviour modification flattens all these examples, all these different slices of life, into one slice. From the point of view of the algorithm, emotions, happiness, and brand loyalty are just different, but similar, signals to optimise.

E is for Earning money from letting the worst people secretly screw with everyone else

The mass behaviour modification machine is rented out to make money. The manipulations are not perfect, but they are powerful enough that it becomes suicidal for brands, politicians, and other competitive entities to forgo payments to Bummer enterprises. Universal cognitive blackmail ensues, resulting in a rising global spend on Bummer.

If someone isn’t paying a platform in cash, then they must turn themselves into data-fuel for that platform in order to not be overwhelmed by it. When Facebook emphasised “news” in its feed, the entire world of journalism had to reformulate itself to Bummer standards. To avoid being left out, journalists had to create stories that emphasised clickbait and were detachable from context. They were forced to become Bummer in order to not be annihilated by it.

F is for Fake mobs and faker society

This component is almost always present, even though it typically wasn’t part of the initial design of a Bummer machine. Fake people are present in unknown but vast numbers and establish the ambience. Bots, AIs, agents, fake reviewers, fake friends, fake followers, fake posters, automated catfishers: a menagerie of wraiths.

Invisible social vandalism ensues. Social pressure, which is so influential in human psychology and behaviour, is synthesised.

The more specifically we can draw a line around a problem, the more solvable that problem becomes. Our problem is not the internet, smartphones, smart speakers, or the art of algorithms; the problem is the Bummer machine. And the core of the machine is not a technology, exactly, but a style of business plan that spews out perverse incentives and corrupts people.

It’s not even a widely used business plan. Outside of China, the only tech giants that fully depend on this system are Facebook and Google. The other three of the big five tech companies indulge occasionally, because it is normalised these days, but they don’t depend on it. A few smaller Bummer companies are also influential, like Twitter, though they often struggle.

Which companies are Bummer? A good way to tell is that first-rank Bummer companies are the ones that attract efforts or spending from bad actors, such as Russian state intelligence warfare units. This test reveals that there are pseudo-services that contain only subsets of the components, like Reddit and 4chan, but still play significant roles in the Bummer ecosystem.

 

 

But this argument is not about corporations, it’s about you. Because we can draw a line around the machine, we can draw a line around what to avoid.

The problem with Bummer is not that it includes any particular technology, but that it’s someone else’s power trip. You might choose to be treated by a cognitive behavioural therapist, and benefit from it. Hopefully that therapist will have sworn an oath to uphold professional standards and will earn your trust. If, however, your therapist is beholden to a giant, remote corporation and is being paid to get you to make certain decisions that aren’t necessarily in your own interests, then that would be a Bummer.

The problem isn’t any particular technology, but the use of technology to manipulate people, to concentrate power in a way that is so nuts and creepy that it becomes a threat to the survival of civilisation.

If you want to help make the world sane, you don’t need to give up your smartphone, using computer cloud services, or visiting websites. Bummer is the stuff to avoid. Delete your accounts!

 

 

One. What is the connection between emotional and financial insecurity?

Social media like Google and Facebook are “free” but this is not really a free service. The cost is huge.

Part of the cost is time and attention, as we see here.

We pay by giving up our private data, which Facebook charges for a price, as we see in this Time article.

Fast Growth

Being free meant Facebook and Google exploded. Huge user base and billions of dollars were made quickly.

Just as quickly, over 2 billion people worldwide became “part-time lab rats” in a diabolical mind control experiment.

Advertising grew and grew on these “free” sites to the point that they became part of “mass behavior modification” (97).

Tech entrepreneurs got super rich and the giant customer base became miserable addicts beholden to the social media “drugs.”

Two. Why would paying for services be better than “free” BUMMER?

For one, the pay distribution would be bigger: More people would make money.

Should you pay Sam Harris directly for his podcast or let him get paid through royalties via some kind of AdSense venue? He probably gets paid 20 times more by direct payment rather than ad royalties.

For two, paying a vendor directly improves content. For example, we pay for HBO, Netflix, and Amazon Prime, and their content is excellent. Compare their content to a YouTuber who makes Adsense revenue.

For three, BUMMER is an unhealthy barter system. Lanier writes: “Let us spy on you and in return you’ll get free services.”

Three. How is BUMMER a disease on Martin Luther King’s dream of the moral arc of justice?

Martin Luther King posited that over time, life’s moral arc tended toward justice. This is described in Timothy Snyder’s book The Road to Unfreedom as the politics of inevitability. It is inevitable that over time the human race gets better: more just, more smart, more moral, more decent.

But there is another vision of the world. We might call it the Pendulum View. The pendulum swings back and forth between justice and evil; kindness and cruelty; love and hate.

Lanier argues that BUMMER destroys the moral arc narrative and makes us tribalistic assholes unable to sustain the kind of democracy that would lift humanity toward the kind of justice Martin Luther King describes (107).

BUMMER weaponizes misinformation to spread racist totalitarianism throughout the world (109).

Themes from World Without End by Franklin Foer

Mold You Into Their Image Is Not Free

We read that social media tech entrepreneurs are attention merchants who make money from stealing your life. This is why social media is not free.

“More than any previous coterie of corporations, the tech monopolies desire to mold humanity into their desired image of it.”

Tech companies don’t make money by helping you preserve your free will. They make money by automating everything you do. You are a lab in a behavioral modification experiment. Your social media is not “free.”

GAFA stays dominant by enslaving you to their product. What is GAFA, as the Europeans call it? GAFA is the following: Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple.

Social Media Is Taking Us to Point of No Return

Foer writes: “Once we cross certain thresholds--once we transform the values of institutions, once we abandon privacy--there’s no turning back, no restoring our lost individuality.”

GAFA controls our diet of information resulting in them controlling our behavior. No one anticipated that a few institutions could control billions of people. This is a dream come true for tech giants.

This is a nightmare for individualism and freedom.

This concentration of power from the monopolies results in the “homogenization” of behavior. This spells death.

Facebook Steals Free Will:

“While it creates the impression that it offers choice, Facebook paternalistically nudges users in the direction it deems best for them, which also happens to be the direction that thoroughly addicts them. It’s a phoniness most obvious in the compressed, historic career of Facebook’s mastermind.”

Algorithms Replace Free Will

Foer writes: “Facebook would never put it this way, but algorithms are meant to erode free will, to relieve humans of the burden of choosing, to nudge them in the right direction.”

You are a transparent lab rat:

Foer writes: Facebook can predict users’ race, sexual orientation, relationship status, and drug use on the the basis of their ‘likes’ alone. It’s Zuckerberg’s fantasy that this data might be analyzed to uncover the mother of all revelations, ‘a fundamental mathematical law underlying human social relationships that governs the balance of who and what we all care about.’”

Amazon’s Growing Monopoly

Amazon’s monopoly control is explained by Hasan Minhaj in his Netflix show The Patriot Act.

“I Quit Social Media” in a 4-minute video.

“Why I Quit Social Media” in an 8-minute video.

“How to Break Your Social Media Addiction” in a 10-minute video.

1A Agenda 3-16-20: Delete Your Social Media, Part 3

Essay Assignment 2 due on March 30 with 2 sources for Works Cited:

For a 1,000-word essay, develop an argumentative thesis that addresses Jaron Lanier (Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now) that social media compromises personal excellence, degrades one’s core humanity, and accelerates the disintegration of democracy. You may also consult Black Mirror episode “Nosedive,” Sherry Turkle’s Ted Talk “Connected, But Alone,” and Tristan Harris’ Ted Talk video “How a Handful of Tech Companies Control Billions of Minds Everyday.” Also consult these works from Tristan Harris: “Our Minds Have Been Hijacked by Our Phones,” and “How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds. You can also use Andrew Sullivan’s and “I Used to be a Human Being” and any other credible source.  

March 9 Essay 1 Due on turnitin. Go over Andrew Sullivan’s “I Used to be a Human Being,” Sherry Turkle, and Tristan Harris. Watch “Nosedive.” Homework #5 for March 11: Read Lanier pages 1-39 and in 200-word paragraph explain how social media destroys free will.

March 11 Go over Lanier 1-39. Homework #6 for March 16: Read pages 39-76 and in a 200-word paragraph explain how social media makes us terrible versions of ourselves.

March 16 Go over Lanier 39-76. Homework #7 for March 18: Read Lanier 76-145 and in 200-word paragraph, explain the pathological effects of BUMMER. 

March 18 Go over Lanier 76-145. Homework #8: Read S-7 Parallelism and define parallelism and take the 2 Practice tests and record your scores before explaining how confident you are no in using parallel structure in future essays. 

March 23 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write an introduction, thesis, and two supporting paragraphs. Go over parallelism. Homework #9: Read S-8 Coordination, Subordination and explain the use of coordination and subordination in writing sentences. Take the 2 Practice tests, report your scores, and explain your confidence level. 

March 25 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write supporting paragraphs, counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, Works Cited page. Go over Homework #9. 

March 30 Essay 2 due on turnitin.

Writing Strategy:

Introduction Paragraph 1:

Summarize Lacey's "nosedive" in the "Nosedive" episode of Black Mirror. 

Or summarize Andrew Sullivan's "nosedive" in his essay "I Used to be Human Being."

Or summarize the "nosedive" of someone you know who got addicted to social media. 

Or summarize social media addiction as described in any Tristan Harris or Sherry Turkle video of your choosing. 

Or summarize Jaron Lanier's central argument in his book. 

Thesis Paragraph 2:

Agree or disagree with the claim that we should delete our social media accounts based on the following evidence:

One. Social media is an addiction trap by design that hijacks our brains. 

Two. Social media brings forth our worst version of ourselves. 

Three. Social media encourages tribalism and alternative realities.

Four. Social media spreads weaponized misinformation.

Five. In its "race to the bottom" to get clickbait, social media erodes liberal democracies around the world. 

Six. Social media encourages us to give up our private data until we have submitted all our privacy, and this surrender will result to a loss of individual rights and freedoms. 

Paragraphs 3-6

Choose 4 of the above points to address in your body paragraphs. 

Counterargument-Rebuttal Paragraph 7

Find a defense of social media and write a rebuttal of it. 

Here are some common counterarguments:

"No one is holding a gun to your head and saying you need to be on social media."

"Social media has connected me to family and friends in ways that otherwise would be impossible."

"You show me extreme cases, but for every pathological social media addict I can show you dozens of well-adjusted mentally healthy people who use social media."

Conclusion Paragraph 8

Write an emotionally powerful restatement of your thesis. 

McMahon’s “Secret” Refutation Essay Outline

Paragraph 1: Summarize Tristan Harris’ YouTube video “How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds everyday,” and address the power of the few over the many; the race to the bottom, the outrage machine making clicks, the loss of free agency (free will), the destruction of democracy, the addiction that is baked in the social media landscape, the attention economy, etc. 

Paragraph 2: Pivot to Jaron Lanier’s claim that we should delete our social media accounts and then argue that deleting one’s account isn’t the solution and provide reasons for your thesis. These reasons will be your supporting paragraphs. 

Some reasons I covered in class:

One. Only mindful people will delete their accounts. This won’t be a game-changer because the majority “Homer Simpsons” won’t heed Harris’ or Lanier’s warnings. 

Two. Saying that something is addicting so it should be eliminated from our life is a weak argument. Lots of things are addicting: TV, German chocolate cake, wine, relationships, etc. Moderation, not abstinence, is the more reasonable response. 

Three. Disciplined use of social media can be valuable for business, communicating with loved ones who are far away, engaging in meaningful political causes, etc. 

Four. Reducing one’s social media by over 90% is probably reasonable. 

Five. Time-blocking one’s day is more reasonable than deleting all of one’s social media accounts. 

Six. One should have a healthy contempt for social media because the diagnosis of its vileness by Harris and Lanier is accurate, but a healthy contempt doesn’t necessarily translate into deleting one’s accounts. As said earlier, a 90% reduction or more is more reasonable unless you’re hopelessly addicted. 

Notice there is no counterargument-rebuttal because the WHOLE essay is a counterargument-rebuttal. This is called a refutation essay.

Conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis. 

 

One. How does Lanier compare the A*** Personality Factor to drug addiction?

Social media leads to addiction, which leads to radical personality change. To become an addict is for a normal person to lose her best self to her monster self.

The addict is in a constant state of neediness and deprivation, looking for the next hit. Smartphone nation is a nation of addicts.

Addiction is about selfishness.

The addict “is always deprived, rushing for affirmation.” He is nervous, “compulsively pecking at his situation.” He is selfish, self-absorbed, and too “wrapped-up” in his addictive cycle to have empathy for others (39).

Addicts succumb to a “personal mythology of grandiosity.” This grandeur speaks to their colossal insecurity.

Social media addicts are aggressive: They victimize others and they play the victim.

Social media addicts become competitive trolls trying to “win points” in arguments and become more and more belligerent.

Lanier notices when he was a prominent blogger at Huffpost he received a torrent of belligerent emails. He noticed manipulation and a prominent phony AH Factor, the result of personalities conforming to online addiction.

Of all the arguments against social media, this is the one that he is most emotional and “visceral” about.

How Social Media Creates A***

Simple syllogism: Assholes get the most attention. Social media creates attention addiction. Therefore, social media creates assholes.

Two. What is Solitary/Pack switch?

Lanier says we all have an inner troll. The troll is the pack wolf. We are more happy and more free as the solitary wolf.

But social media makes us pack wolves.

We all have a Solitary/Pack switch for our inner wolf.

Social media flips the Pack switch on. We become obsessed with our ranking in the wolf pack. Where we stand in our social hierarchy is our everything, so much that we lose contact with reality. Loyalty to the pack becomes more important that any adherence to reality, so if our pack denies climate change, we deny climate change to the death.

If our pack supports a racist politician, we justify our support of this racist politician. We may deny that this politician is racist even if overwhelming evidence supports the contrary.

This Pack Behavior is ruining America. It’s making us divided against each other. Social media has accelerated Pack Behavior in ways we cannot even imagine because in part in a very short period of time close to 2.5 billion people worldwide are on social media.

Pack behavior also creates a social outrage machine on Twitter where people will gang up on someone who is perceived as being bad. People get like sharks tasting blood. Take the case of Justine Sacco, for example.

Solitary Wolf

In contrast to being a Pack Wolf, a Solitary Wolf is an independent critical thinker who isn’t beholden to groupthink or being beholden to conforming to the pack.

Pack Behavior on Facebook and Twitter

Where you stand in the social hierarchy in Facebook and Twitter worlds becomes important because the social media environment manipulates you based on rewards and punishments. Rewards are likes and followers, which produce dopamine. We get addicted to dopamine and begin to behave in ways that will enhance our social esteem on these platforms, what Lanier calls “BUMMERland.”

We will also share outrage of the Pack.

We can become an inner troll as a result.

Lanier’s conclusion: Exit BUMMERland.

Three. How does fakery grow exponentially on social media?

Because behavior modification steers people to be fake versions of themselves, curating some grandiose self, everything else that generates from social media is likewise fake (54).

BUMMER amplifies everything that is fake because in part fake gets attention; real does not.

How Lies Beat the Truth

Armies of fake people gather to “steal the oxygen in the room” so that real voices can’t be heard (55).  

If swarms of trolls repeat lies over and over, how do truth-tellers spend time on real news when they have to waste their time refuting lies, which becomes an exercise in futility.

When trolls accused President Obama of being a Muslim terrorist who didn’t have a birth certificate to prove that he was born in America, the media wasted a lot of time rebuking a lie that was so preposterous that it should not have been even addressed, but because of huge movement propagated this lie, the lie could not be ignored. The lie “stole the oxygen in the room,” so to speak.

Holocaust Deniers on Facebook

Zuckerberg allows Holocaust deniers to have a voice on Facebook as we read in this Guardian article.

Fake News Makes Money for Social Media Sites

Fake accounts spreading sensational fake news get a lot of hits and traffic for Facebook and YouTube, so these platforms profit from lies.

Fake news makes lots of money and is hard to detect, as we see in this Washington Post article.

Writing fake news can make individuals more than $10,000 a month on AdSense according to this Washington Post article.

Social Media Profits from Tribalistic Partisan Hatred of The Other

Fair-minded news is too boring for social media platforms, which appeal to our lowest reptilian self, so social media news by its very nature is tribalistic, partisan, hateful, and reptilian. As a result, America has never been so divided (57).

Fake News Is Dangerous

The mass lie that vaccination shots are dangerous and the cause of autism gains steam on social media platforms so that parents deny their children proper vaccinations. This can result in epidemics of measles and other life-threatening diseases.  

People who immerse themselves in BUMMER cannot think critically. They are loyal to their tribe but disconnected from reality.

Four. How does social media remove context?

Social media replaces any context you give to your content with its own context, based on algorithms. “You are no longer a name but a number” (65). He continues: “A number is public verification of reduced freedom, status, and personhood.” In other words, living in social media’s algorithm-based context is a prison.

Five. How is social media destroying empathy and human connection?

Two ways: tribalism by isolating us in our own filter bubbles and the loss of public space to inward smartphone absorption.

Filter bubbles alters our reality and cuts us off the reality of others, as explained in this Ted Talk video of 9 minutes.

Consider we live in our own filter bubbles.

Consider we are cut off from our sense of physical space as we get and more and more plugged in to our smartphones.

Consider we become loyal to our tribe by expressing rage against our foes on the Social Outrage Machine of social media.

Consider all of the above, and you’ll see we’re becoming a people cut off from one other. This should concern us for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is violence.

Six. How does social media strip us of our capacity for happiness?

Social media makes its profits by winning our attention, so much so that these “attention merchants” are motivated to turn us into addicts. Addiction spells the end of happiness. As Jaron Lanier writes: “It will dole out sparse charms in between the doldrums as well, since the autopilot that tugs at your emotions will discover that the contrast between treats and punishment is more effective than either treats or punishment alone. Addiction is associated with anhedonia, the lessened ability to take pleasure from life apart from whatever one is addicted to, and social media addicts appear to be prone to long-term anhedonia” (82).

Anhedonia is the self-imposed prison of isolation and futile pleasure from a life that is beholden to addiction.

Fakery on the Internet

"How Much of the Internet Is Fake?" by Max Read

Addiction & Feedback Loop

One. How long would you stay on Facebook or any other social media site if your posts were ignored?

These social media sites would die except that they give feedback. For example, one of the most popular sites, Reddit, uses up and down arrows to show approval or condemnation of posts.

Feedback is a reward system that stimulates the brain.

Social media works in part because of what we might call the Mutual Sycophant Club: I scratch your back and you scratch my back. We like each other’s posts, no matter how insipid, unremarkable, and mediocre, in order to fuel the feedback loop.

Getting caught up in this loop is a huge time suck, a huge distraction, a huge waste, and a huge diversion from meaningful pursuits. But its draw is peer pressure and the tyranny of Technology: Don’t live in the common currency of technology and be irrelevant, invisible, and essentially dead.

It takes a lot of courage to live off the grid.

Many people cannot do it. They are so dependent on the sense of community, however fake, that they derive from their social media accounts. To delete their accounts would result in a feeling of terrifying, primal aloneness, for which there is no word in English. We have to look to German:

Mutterseelinallein: complete abandonment, the sense that your mother's soul has left you. 

People with tattered, undeveloped, needy selves will be too scared to go off the grid because they will become possessed by the terror of mutterseelinallein. 

Feedback Loop Can Be Explained by Pigeon Experiments

In 1971, researcher Michael Zeiler did pigeon experiments in which he found they pecked more ravenously when their pellet rewards were inconsistently given because the inconsistency was analogous to gambling’s dopamine effects.

Decades later, Facebook did an experiment with a “like” button, the first of its kind on the Internet, and the “like” button had the effect of crack cocaine. It was a game-changer. Suddenly Facebook grew exponentially, not just in users, but in the amount of time users spent on Facebook.

Getting “likes” was like gambling. Your uploaded photo might win a lucky strike or it might be a dud, but when you got a “full house,” as it were, you received a huge dopamine hit.

Facebook users got addicted. They experienced euphoria when they enjoyed a hailstorm of “likes”; they experienced shame and anguish when their posts were ignored or not liked.

Think about it: Adults with higher degrees of education, with high-ranking jobs, with family responsibilities were sitting at their computers in their robes drinking their green Matcha tea or eating their Hot Pockets while obsessing over their Facebook ranking. They had been reduced to experimental pigeons. They had become needy and pathetic.

But here’s the thing: Users were on Facebook LONGER than before. And that’s the point. Website creators want you on their site, the longer the better. They need to find ways to get you hooked. They don’t like you. They don’t respect you. They look at you as a potential addict, and they’re the pusher.

They actually look at you as a dumb rat or a dumb pigeon. They are rich, and they are laughing at us.

In fact, Mark Zuckerberg is on record for having said that “trusting Facebook users are dumb *****.”

Two. What is the Human Self-Inflicted Distraction Principle?

Studies show that humans can’t sit still. They can’t be alone with their thoughts. They settle into a life of easy because, ironically, settling into the good life, a life full of comfort and non-conflict, drives people crazy.

People will induce their own problems out of nothing, they will create new challenges, they will sink into a hole, just so they can create a solution to a problem that never had to exist in the first place.

Rich movie stars do nose dives into self-destruction, we are told, because the thrill of success can’t be enjoyed unless interrupted by challenge.

In other words, we’re incurably stupid.

We operate on the Self-Inflicted Distraction Principle.

The drug pushers of the Internet know this all too well.

The makers of games know this all too well.

Tetris and World of Warcraft are built for people who need constant challenge and distraction.

People are addicted to setting never-ending goals to avoid being still.

Karoshi

They play games, try to improve their social media status, wear fitness watches, take their work home on laptops to “get ahead of the curve,” and the final summation of this never-ending treadmill is the Japanese term karoshi—“death from overworking.”

Getting on the Internet treadmill becomes a neurosis and a disease. People lose their essential self, and they don’t know it because it feels normal.

Three. What is the Zeigarnik Effect?

Incomplete experiences occupy our minds and stay in our memories more than completed ones.

This is analogous to a cliff hanger for a TV show. If it ends on a cliff hanger, we are more likely to become obsessed and watch subsequent shows.

Cliff hangers can create compulsive binge-watching.

“Post-play” maximizes the cliff hanger principle. Breaking Bad from Netflix becomes a 13-hour nonstop movie punctuated with cliff hangers.

The Assist

The Netflix binge became a phenomenon, and the binge works because in addition to cliff hangers, Netflix has your programming defaulted so that if you do nothing but just sit in front of the screen the next episode will begin automatically. This is called an “assist” in the industry.

Four. What is the “bad is stronger than good” principle?

No matter how good the reviews on Yelp, Amazon, and Rate My Professor, it’s the bad reviews that stick out and have the biggest influence on people.

This principle applies to social media. You may get lots of good feedback on your channel, but it’s the mean ones that punch you in the gut and make you forget the positive feedback.

Always wanting to overcome negative feedback with greater and greater positive feedback feeds social media addiction.

Five. Why are children more vulnerable to Internet addiction than adults?

Children don’t have the natural boundaries that mature people have.

And just as dangerous, if we let children do easy things like using the Internet at the expense of more difficult albeit rewarding things like reading books, we deprive children of an important principle: Hardship inoculation.

The younger we experience tough tasks and learn how to overcome their difficulty the more we will embrace meaningful, challenging tasks later in life. For example, we may be tragically raising a generation of non-book readers.

Six. What is gamification?

Gamification is taking a non-game experience like fitness, nutrition, or social media abstinence, and turning it into a game with points and opportunities to beat personal records and so on.

Alter writes: “Gamification is a powerful business tool and if harnessed appropriately it also drives happier, healthier, and wiser behavior. “

 

 

 

 

1A Agenda 3-11-20: Delete Your Social Media Accounts, Part 2

Essay Assignment 2 due on March 30 with 2 sources for Works Cited:

For a 1,000-word essay, develop an argumentative thesis that addresses Jaron Lanier (Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now) that social media compromises personal excellence, degrades one’s core humanity, and accelerates the disintegration of democracy. You may also consult Black Mirror episode “Nosedive,” Sherry Turkle’s Ted Talk “Connected, But Alone,” and Tristan Harris’ Ted Talk video “How a Handful of Tech Companies Control Billions of Minds Everyday.” Also consult these works from Tristan Harris: “Our Minds Have Been Hijacked by Our Phones,” and “How Technology Hijacks People’s Minds. You can also use Andrew Sullivan’s and “I Used to be a Human Being” and any other credible source.  

March 9 Essay 1 Due on turnitin. Go over Andrew Sullivan’s “I Used to be a Human Being,” Sherry Turkle, and Tristan Harris. Watch “Nosedive.” Homework #5 for March 11: Read Lanier pages 1-39 and in 200-word paragraph explain how social media destroys free will.

March 11 Go over Lanier 1-39. Homework #6 for March 16: Read pages 39-76 and in a 200-word paragraph explain how social media makes us terrible versions of ourselves.

March 16 Go over Lanier 39-76. Homework #7 for March 18: Read Lanier 76-145 and in 200-word paragraph, explain the pathological effects of BUMMER. 

March 18 Go over Lanier 76-145. Homework #8: Read S-7 Parallelism and define parallelism and take the 2 Practice tests and record your scores before explaining how confident you are no in using parallel structure in future essays. 

March 23 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write an introduction, thesis, and two supporting paragraphs. Go over parallelism. Homework #9: Read S-8 Coordination, Subordination and explain the use of coordination and subordination in writing sentences. Take the 2 Practice tests, report your scores, and explain your confidence level. 

March 25 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write supporting paragraphs, counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, Works Cited page. Go over Homework #9. 

March 30 Essay 2 due on turnitin.

Writing Strategy:

Introduction Paragraph 1:

Summarize Lacey's "nosedive" in the "Nosedive" episode of Black Mirror. 

Or summarize Andrew Sullivan's "nosedive" in his essay "I Used to be Human Being."

Or summarize the "nosedive" of someone you know who got addicted to social media. 

Or summarize social media addiction as described in any Tristan Harris or Sherry Turkle video of your choosing. 

Or summarize Jaron Lanier's central argument in his book. 

Thesis Paragraph 2:

Agree or disagree with the claim that we should delete our social media accounts based on the following evidence:

One. Social media is an addiction trap by design that hijacks our brains. 

Two. Social media brings forth our worst version of ourselves. 

Three. Social media encourages tribalism and alternative realities.

Four. Social media spreads weaponized misinformation.

Five. In its "race to the bottom" to get clickbait, social media erodes liberal democracies around the world. 

Six. Social media encourages us to give up our private data until we have submitted all our privacy, and this surrender will result to a loss of individual rights and freedoms. 

Paragraphs 3-6

Choose 4 of the above points to address in your body paragraphs. 

Counterargument-Rebuttal Paragraph 7

Find a defense of social media and write a rebuttal of it. 

Here are some common counterarguments:

"No one is holding a gun to your head and saying you need to be on social media."

"Social media has connected me to family and friends in ways that otherwise would be impossible."

"You show me extreme cases, but for every pathological social media addict I can show you dozens of well-adjusted mentally healthy people who use social media."

Conclusion Paragraph 8

Write an emotionally powerful restatement of your thesis. 

Social Media Is Designed for to be Addictive

Material from Adam Alter's Irresistible: The Rise of Addictive Technology and the Business of Keeping Us Hooked

 

One. How does “Never Get High on Your Own Supply” pertain to Steve Jobs?

Adam Alter is making the point that even as Steve Jobs wallowed in the glory of making the greatest Internet device ever, the iPad, he refused to use one or let his children use one.

Likewise, other tech avatars refuse to let their children use iPads. They sent their kids to expensive private anti-technology Waldorf schools.

The point is that drug dealers stay strong and rich by not getting high on their own supply.

Alter asks a great question: Why are all the world’s greatest public technocrats also in private the world’s greatest technophobes?

Clearly, they know the dirt. They know the hell that is at the end of the iPad journey. They’ve seen the darkness, and they don’t want to go there. They don’t want their kids to go there.

But they want you and me to go there. They want our money. They want us hooked on technology they don't want for their kids, and this speaks to a huge exposure: The tech giants' moral integrity is seriously lacking.

Alter is making the point that we might reconsider embracing technology made by people who have no moral integrity and who secondly wouldn’t privately use the gadgets they make so seductive to the rest of us.

Adler asks: Could you imagine the outcry if religious leaders didn’t let their children practice the religion they preach to you?

What if the FDA recommended food to the public that the FDA wouldn't let their children eat? That they themselves would not eat? Imagine the scandal. 

Why the double standard in technology? Because we're addicts, and addicts don't use their brains. 

This book's introduction is a piece of rhetorical brilliance as it drives home the point that the technology that is being foisted upon us is by its very nature addictive. It’s not built to help us. It’s built to manipulate us. The technology makes money for its creators after all.

Video game designers avoid World of Warcraft.

An Instagram engineer admits Instagram is designed to send its users down a bottomless pit of addiction.

Smartwatches, Facebook and Netflix, like Instagram, are designed to maximize addiction and obsession.

A smartphone is an opium-drip gadget you carry around with you 24/7.

Two. Why can “normal” people succumb to addiction?

Because addiction is about immersion into environment and circumstance.

Steve Jobs and other successful technocrats know the secrets of addiction, and the addiction model is what fuels their designs.

Making irresistible tools to ensnare us is the formula for success in the crowded tech space.

Therefore, technocrats are in the addiction business.

“Design ethicist” Tristan Harris says even normal people with strong levels of willpower will succumb to addiction when “there are a thousand people on the other side of the screen whose job it is to break down the self-regulation you have.”

New York Times journalist Nick Bolton, who doesn’t allow himself or his children to use an iPad, observes that the environment and circumstances for addiction in the digital age have no precedent in human history.

We can be snared by many digital hooks:

Facebook

Twitter

Instagram

Porn

Email

Online shopping

The list goes one until we’ve lost the very core of our being.

In the early 2000s, tech was slow and “clunky,” but now it’s fast. It has to be fast if it’s to have sufficient addictive powers.

Tech engineers do thousands of experiments to make the visual experience appealing and addictive. They’ve created a sort of digital Las Vegas to seduce us.

Newer and newer versions of these digital Las Vegas seductive machines keep coming out until they’re “weaponized.”

“In 2004, Facebook was fun. In 2016, it’s addictive.”

Behavioral psychologists say everyone has an addiction, even successful, educated people, and they learn to compartmentalize, which means be functional addicts, like the teacher who has $80,000 debt from online shopping.

Three. Is Adam Alter guilty of making an over simplistic, paranoid anti-technology rant?

No, the concedes that technology has many virtues and advantages, and he has used tech to stay in touch with his family from Australia.

His book is not an anti-technology screed. He writes that technology is neither good nor bad until it’s designed for mass consumption.

Four. How our substance addictions and behavioral addictions similar?

Both stimulate the same area of the brain. But there’s a big difference. If you’re a speed or alcohol addict, you can do a lot to change your environment to avoid speed and alcohol.

But technology is different. It’s part of who we are, where we work, and how we connect with others. It is ubiquitous, meaning it is everywhere.

We can create boundaries and minimize digital addiction if we understand how behavioral addiction works.

Five. What 6 Ingredients does technology contain to create behavioral addictions?

One, it creates compelling goals just beyond our reach. We can never have enough likes or followers, for example.

Two, it gives us irresistible and unpredictable feedback.

Three, it creates a sense of incremental progress and improvement.

Four, it creates tasks that slowly become more difficult over time.

Five, it creates unresolved tensions that demand resolution.

Six, it provides a sense (delusion?) of strong social connection.

Six. What is the smartphone screen time average for people who use the app Moment because they are concerned about how much time they’re using their smartphones every day?

About 3 hours. We can infer that people who don’t use Moment are on a lot more. Not knowing how much we use something, and not wanting to know, contributes to behavioral addiction.

In the same way, food obsessives are asked to keep a food journal in which they write down everything they eat. This cuts down on eating.

Most smartphone users are addicts. They spend over a quarter of their life on the smartphone. And they don’t even know it.

Seven. What’s the difference between addiction and passion?

Addiction is a deep attachment to an experience that is harmful and difficult to do without.

Addictions arise when a person can’t resist a behavior (compulsion), which, despite addressing a deep psychological need in the short-term, produces significant harm in the long-term.

Addictions bring the promise of an immediate award or positive reinforcement.

Original use of the word addiction was in ancient Rome, and it meant a strong bond to something like slavery. So the first sense of the word addiction was to be enslaved to something.

Passion is different than addiction.

Passion is a strong drive for an activity that is important and valued as bringing meaning to one’s life. Because this passion is valued, it is worth the time and energy devoted to pursuing it.

Whereas we feel free to choose our passion, we are slaves to addiction, which is a form of compulsion.

Eight. How common are Internet-based behavioral addictions?

Internet Addiction Test (IAT)

The Internet Addiction Test (IAT) is the first Validated measure of Internet Addiction described in the IAT Manual to measure Internet use in terms of mild, moderate, to several levels of addiction.

For more information on using the IAT and building an Internet Addiction treatment program in your practice, visit RestoreRecovery.net for our comprehensive workbook and training programs.

Based upon the following five-point Likert scale, select the response that best represents the frequency of the behavior described in the following 20-item questionnaire.

0 = Not Applicable
1 = Rarely
2 = Occasionally
3 = Frequently
4 = Often
5 = Always

1. ___How often do you find that you stay online longer than you intended?
2. ___How often do you neglect household chores to spend more time online?
3. ___How often do you prefer the excitement of the Internet to intimacy with your partner?
4. ___How often do you form new relationships with fellow online users?
5. ___How often do others in your life complain to you about the amount of time you spend online?
6. ___How often do your grades or school work suffer because of the amount of time you spend online?
7. ___How often do you check your e-mail before something else that you need to do?
8. ___How often does your job performance or productivity suffer because of the Internet?
9. ___How often do you become defensive or secretive when anyone asks you what you do online?
10. ___How often do you block out disturbing thoughts about your life with soothing thoughts of the Internet?
11. ___How often do you find yourself anticipating when you will go online again?
12. ___How often do you fear that life without the Internet would be boring, empty, and joyless?
13. ___How often do you snap, yell, or act annoyed if someone bothers you while you are online?
14. ___How often do you lose sleep due to late-night log-ins?
15. ___How often do you feel preoccupied with the Internet when off-line, or fantasize about being online?
16. ___How often do you find yourself saying “just a few more minutes” when online?
17. ___How often do you try to cut down the amount of time you spend online and fail?
18. ___How often do you try to hide how long you’ve been online?
19. ___How often do you choose to spend more time online over going out with others?
20. ___How often do you feel depressed, moody, or nervous when you are off-line, which goes away once you are back online?

After all the questions have been answered, add the numbers for each response to obtain a final score. The higher the score, the greater the level of addiction and creation of problems resultant from such Internet usage.  The severity impairment index is as follows:

NONE 0 – 30 points

MILD 31- 49 points: You are an average online user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.

MODERATE 50 -79 points: You are experiencing occasional or frequent problems because of the Internet. You should consider their full impact on your life.

SEVERE 80 – 100 points: Your Internet usage is causing significant problems in your life. You should evaluate the impact of the Internet on your life and address the problems directly caused by your Internet usage.

Personal Score

 

I took the test and scored a 57, which is a low moderate addiction.

 

University Students

We see that 48% of university students suffer Internet addiction.

Worldwide, Internet addiction is about 40%.

Nine. What is the purpose of Alter’s long exposition on Freud’s research into cocaine?

Freud and others believed cocaine as safe. Coca-Cola sold cocaine to its consumers because cocaine was considered a safe and natural ingredient. We look back at this as foolishness because now we have a body of research that exposes the dangerous addictive forming nature of the drug.

In the same way, Alter wants us to see social media as early cocaine, something seen as safe or benign in the absence of massive research.

Alter’s book is one of the first comprehensive books about the internet and social media addiction.

But we see evidence that tech gadgets are like cocaine. Psychologist Catherine Steiner-Adair observes that many children see their parents as “Missing in Action” as these parents are lost zombies, their noses deep in the screens of their iPads even while they sit with their children at the dinner table.

Parents claim they love their children, but they are mentally absent and are back-seating their children in favor of their gadget addiction.

“Wait, honey, I have to check my phone.”

“Not yet, honey, I have to check this text.”

These common words evidence twisted priorities of a nation of addicts.

And what’s worse is this behavior seems normal because everyone does it.

Ten. What game-changing study radically altered our view of addiction?

In 1954, Olds and Milner discovered that stimulating the pleasure centers of rats’ brains made them addicts.

Before this experiment, it was believed that certain people had a predisposition to addiction.

But juxtaposing the Olds and Milner Study with Vietnam Vets (20% developed heroin addiction), we saw that addiction was based on environment and circumstance.

You could have a healthy “non-addict” disposition, but still be a victim of addiction if your brain’s pleasure centers were stimulated effectively.

Welcome to the Internet.

 

Lesson Two. Based on Chapter 2 and 3 

One. What makes it difficult to free ourselves from smartphone and general internet addiction? 

The habits we have are “culturally ingrained,” and they are backed by “power psychological forces” that makes us feel that we are losing control. 

Newport argues that no small tweaks will cure us of our dysfunction; rather, we need a “philosophy of technology use” (36).

"It's Time to Confront the Threat of Right-Wing Terrorism" by John Cassidy in The New Yorker

Related Topic About Social Media: Should We Censor Racist Trolls?

Read "It's Time to Confront the Threat of Right-Wing Terrorism" by John Cassidy in The New Yorker and "Does the banning of Alex Jones signal a new era of big tech responsibility?" by Julia Carrie Wong and Olivia Solon in The Guardian and agree or disagree with the claim that big tech companies are morally obliged to censor right-wing white nationalist trolls such as Alex Jones. 

 

 

1C Agenda 3-5-20: Noble Savage Myth, Harari's Bias, Signal Phrase Review, Logical Fallacies; Essay Option 1 Outlines

March 3 Cover the Agricultural Revolution. Homework #5:  Read Sapiens to page 159 and in 200 words explain how “imagined orders and hierarchies” resulted in “unfair discrimination.”

March 5 Logical Fallacies and Signal Phrase review; Go over Sapiens to page 200. 

March 10 Chromebook In-Class Objective: Write first half of the essay.

March 12 Chromebook In-Class Objective: Write second half of the essay. 

March 17 Essay 1 Due on turnitin

Essay #1 (1,000 words)

You need minimum 2 sources for your MLA Works Cited page.

Choice A

Read Tad Friend’s New Yorker online article “Can a Burger Help Solve Climate Change?” and look at two opposing camps on the role of alternative protein sources as a viable replacement for meat. One camp says we face too many obstacles to accept non-animal alternative proteins: evolution, taste, and  cost, to name several. An opposing camp says we have the technology and the proven product in Impossible Foods and other non-meat proteins to replace animal protein. Assessing these two opposing camps in the context of Tad Friend’s essay, develop an argumentative thesis addresses the question: How viable is the push for tech companies to help climate change by replacing animals with alternative proteins?

Choice B

Read Elizabeth Anderson’s “If God Is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?” and defend, refute, or complicate the author’s claim that non-religious societies offer a superior moral framework for human evolution than religious societies.  

Choice C

In the context of the Netflix documentary Fyre: The Greatest Party That Never Happened, develop an argument about how Yuval Noah Harari's explanation of the Cognitive Revolution exposes human vulnerability to mass manipulation, deceit, and Groupthink.

Choice D

Support, refute, or complicate Harari’s assertion that the “agricultural revolution was the greatest crime against humanity.”

Choice B

Support, refute, or complicate Harari’s assertion that the “agricultural revolution was the greatest crime against humanity.”  

You need minimum 2 sources for your MLA Works Cited page.

Sample Thesis and Outline 

Harari makes a persuasive case that the AR is inferior to the Forager Age evidenced by __________________, ________________, ____________________, and ______________________.  

Paragraph 1: Introduction explains the differences between foragers and inhabitants of the AR.

Paragraph 2: Thesis or claim

Paragraphs 3-6: Supporting paragraphs

Paragraph 7: Counterargument-rebuttal

Paragraph 8: Conclusion is powerful restatement of thesis

Sample Counterargument and Conclusion

While I love Sapiens as a life-altering book on how I regard the human race, where we came from, where we are today, and where we are going, I am not totally drinking the Noah Yuval Harari Kool-Aid. I in fact agree with those critics who observe that Harari commits a sort of implied Noble Savage Fallacy by suggesting that pre-agriculture society was vastly superior to the evils evident in a post-agricultural state. Ruthless tyrants indeed flourished in the Agriculture Age, but evil “shot-callers” have always been with us. Any microsociety has an Alpha who dominates the others. Where I agree with Harari is that the Agriculture Age scaled this evil because agriculture resulted in a population explosion. 

Secondly, it is too late to fret over our morbidly obese, tooth-decayed post-Forager condition. The Genie is out of the bottle, so to speak. Rather than long to run through jungles in animal skins with our ripped bodies, we need to look at how we might flourish in a world sodden with mono-crops and a growing appetite for mass-produced animal flesh. Here, Harari argues that that A.I. might navigate us out of our self-destruction if we don’t kill ourselves first. 

In sum, Harari’s Sapiens is a masterpiece, an unflinching critique of our violent and irrational appetites, our grand imagination, and our drive for dominance, which may or may not spell our demise. 

Counterarguments: Noble Savage Myth

Possible counterarguments in Quillette: “Romanticizing the Hunter-Gatherer” by William Buckner

A related criticism is in Will Day-Brosnan's book review: 

Elsewhere, I wondered the extent to which Harari was projecting an idealistic (even Rousseauian) vision of a noble savage on pre-state peoples. His depiction of a foraging lifestyle (‘A Day in the Life of Adam and Eve’) unencumbered by the complexities and worries of civilisational living could be read as reactionary atavism. In this section, the bibliography and citations are also problematic, Harari makes claims for which it is difficult to trace a source. For example, he affirms that ‘loneliness and privacy were rare [amongst hunter gatherers]’; that the human population ‘was smaller than that of today’s Cairo’; that the ‘average ancient forager could turn a flint stone into a spear point within minutes’; and that ‘hunter gatherers living today… work on average for just thirty five to forty five hours a week’ (52-6). If sources for these claims exist, they are very difficult to correlate with the text.

Signal Phrase Guidelines:

About 80% of your essay should be written in your voice with your words.

Another 20% of your essay will consist of quotations, paraphrase, and summary from the book Sapiens and credible source of your choice.  We call this "cited material."

When you introduce your cited material, you must use signal phrases. 

Sample List of Signal Phrases (active as of 2-29-20)

When you cite material, paraphrases and summaries are with few exceptions superior to direct quotations. 

You need minimum 2 sources for your MLA Works Cited page.

Signal Phrases

Purpose

We use signal phrases to signal to the reader that we are going to cite research material in the form of direct quotes, paraphrase or summary.

You can also call a signal phrase a lead-in because it leads in the quotation or paraphrase. 

Grammarian Diana Hacker writes that signal phrases make smooth transitions from your own writing voice to the quoted material without making the reader feel a "jolt."

Another Purpose: Providing Context

Signal phrases not only establish authority and credibility. They provide context or explain why you're using the sourced material. 

Example:

As a counterpoint to Yuval Noah Harari's contention that Foragers lived superior lives to Farmers, we read in culture critic Will Day Brosnan: "Elsewhere, I wondered the extent to which Harari was projecting an idealistic (even Rousseauian) vision of a noble savage on pre-state peoples. His depiction of a foraging lifestyle (‘A Day in the Life of Adam and Eve’) unencumbered by the complexities and worries of civilisational living could be read as reactionary atavism."

Same Example with Different Context:

Concurring with my assertion that Harari is misguided in his Noble Savage mythology, we read in culture critic Will Day Brosnan: "Elsewhere, I wondered the extent to which Harari was projecting an idealistic (even Rousseauian) vision of a noble savage on pre-state peoples. His depiction of a foraging lifestyle (‘A Day in the Life of Adam and Eve’) unencumbered by the complexities and worries of civilisational living could be read as reactionary atavism."

Different Example for Supporting Paragraph

Further supporting my contention that not all calories are equal, we find in science writer Gary Taubes' Good Calories, Bad Calories that there is statistics that show . . ."

Use the above templates and don't worry: you're not committing plagiarism.

As a counterpoint to X, 

As a counterargument to my claim that X, 

Giving support to my rebuttal that Writer A makes an erroneous contention, Writer B observes that . . .

Concurring with my assertion that X, 

Further supporting my contention that X, 

Credentials, Establishing Authority, and Ethos

We often include credentials with the signal phrase to give more credibility for our sourced material. 

The acclaimed best-selling writer, history professor, and futurist Yuval Noah Harari excoriates the Agricultural Revolution as "the greatest crime against humanity." 

You don't have to put the signal phrase at the beginning. You can put it at the end:

"The Agricultural Revolution is the greatest crime against humanity," claims celebrated author and futurist Yuval Noah Harari. 

You can also put the signal phrase in the middle of a sentence:

Racism, sexism, worker exploitation, and pestilence afflicted the human race during the Agricultural Revolution, claims celebrated futurist Yuval Noah Harari, who goes on to make the bold claim that "the Agricultural Revolution was the greatest crime perpetrated against humanity." 

Partial List of Signal Phrases

acknowledges  adds admits affirms agrees answers argues asserts claims comments concedes confirms contends counters counterattacks declares defines denies disputes echoes endorses estimates finds grants illustrates implies insists mentions notes observes predicts proposes reasons recognizes recommends refutes rejects reports responds reveals speculates states suggests surmises warns writes

Varying placement and types of signal phrases helps you avoid monotony, makes you a more impressive writer, and gives you more ethos. 

Examples of a signal phrases:

We are fools if we think we were put on Planet Earth to be happy. That is the fantasy of a four-year-old child. Ironically, this infantile pursuit of happiness makes us unhappy. In the words of John Mellencamp: “I don’t think we’re put on this earth to live happy lives. I think we’re put here to challenge ourselves physically, emotionally, intellectually.”

The idea of a meritocracy is that a healthy society allows people with merits, regardless of their economic privilege, to rise to the top of the power hierarchy. However, such a meritocracy does not exist as privilege, not merit, is the dominant force of acquiring power. As we read in Yale Law School professor Daniel Markovits' essay "How Life Became an Endless Terrible Competition": "Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, and Yale collectively enroll more students from households in the top 1 percent of the income distribution than from households in the bottom 60 percent. Legacy preferences, nepotism, and outright fraud continue to give rich applicants corrupt advantages. But the dominant causes of this skew toward wealth can be traced to meritocracy. On average, children whose parents make more than $200,000 a year score about 250 points higher on the SAT than children whose parents make $40,000 to $60,000. Only about one in 200 children from the poorest third of households achieves SAT scores at Yale’s median. Meanwhile, the top banks and law firms, along with other high-paying employers, recruit almost exclusively from a few elite colleges."

Variation of the above:

The idea of a meritocracy is that a healthy society allows people with merits, regardless of their economic privilege, to rise to the top of the power hierarchy. However, such a meritocracy does not exist as privilege, not merit, is the dominant force of acquiring power. According to Yale Law School professor Daniel Markovits in his essay "How Life Became an Endless Terrible Competition": "Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, and Yale collectively enroll more students from households in the top 1 percent of the income distribution than from households in the bottom 60 percent. Legacy preferences, nepotism, and outright fraud continue to give rich applicants corrupt advantages. But the dominant causes of this skew toward wealth can be traced to meritocracy. On average, children whose parents make more than $200,000 a year score about 250 points higher on the SAT than children whose parents make $40,000 to $60,000. Only about one in 200 children from the poorest third of households achieves SAT scores at Yale’s median. Meanwhile, the top banks and law firms, along with other high-paying employers, recruit almost exclusively from a few elite colleges."

Toolbox of Explaining Transitions

After you present the signal phrase and quoted, summarized, or paraphrased material, what do you write?

You explain what you just cited.

To do so, you need a toolbox of transitions:

Writer X is essentially saying that 

In other words, X is arguing that

By using these statistics, X is making the point that 

X is trying to make the point that 

X makes the cogent observation that 

X is essentially rebutting the philosophical movement that embraces the position that 

X's main point is that

The essence of X's claim is that 

 

 

Logical Fallacy of Denialism and Fake Reality Bubbles in Age of Social Media

Denialism is rejecting reality, facts, and inconvenient truths by surrounding oneself in one's social media information bubble. 

One. Lazy "research" at "University of Google."

Two. Drowning in a sea of irrelevancies rather than relying on peer-reviewed studies.

Three. People feel emboldened to challenge science because of their ideological tribe, which gives them power in numbers.

Four. Viral or trending information, even when a lie, quickly becomes truth. 

Five. People want validation from their tribe more than they want to pursue truth. 

Six. Conspiracy theories get pumped up on social media with false studies, and the majority do not know how to discern real from fake Intel. 

Seven. Confirmation bias is available on social media: We cherry-pick evidence that conveniently fits our worldview. Perhaps we see some confirmation bias in Yuval Noah Harari's claim that AR is inferior to Hunter-Gatherer Society. 

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.”

Choice A

Read Tad Friend’s New Yorker online article “Can a Burger Help Solve Climate Change?” and look at two opposing camps on the role of alternative protein sources as a viable replacement for meat. One camp says we face too many obstacles to accept non-animal alternative proteins: evolution, taste, and cost, to name several. An opposing camp says we have the technology and the proven product in Impossible Foods and other non-meat proteins to replace animal protein. Assessing these two opposing camps in the context of Tad Friend’s essay, develop an argumentative thesis addresses the question: How viable is the push for tech companies to help climate change by replacing animals with alternative proteins?

Sample Introduction and Thesis #1:

The viability problem with alternative burgers like Impossible Foods’ version is a matter of whole vs. processed foods. Is the Impossible Burger a whole food? Clearly, it is not. It is a highly processed food thing larded with oil and sodium, so that anyone like myself aspiring to good health is going to stay away from any kind of Frankenstein Patty. If we want to stop eating beef, then we need not replace our “old girlfriend” with her inferior twin. We need to start anew with no such baggage.  Therefore, while the Impossible Burger is a sort of bait and switch, offering a more environmentally-friendly version of a burger, it is not a viable alternative to beef because it is still junk food and should not be looked at as a desirable food for healthy eating. At best, it should be looked at like pizza, an occasional foray into a “cheat meal.”

Explanation of the Above Thesis

In the above example, the writer would focus on why “Frankenstein Patties” are not healthy for regular eating. 

But this may not be enough material for a 1,000-word essay, so let’s revise:

Sample Thesis #1 Revised:

Frankenstein Patties may be trendy and hyped in our social media environment, but they are not a viable replacement for beef burgers because they are not healthy alternatives, they are too costly, and they do not satisfy the human inborn craving for real meat. 

Sample Thesis #2

While I will concede that the oil and sodium used in vegan burgers are not ideal, feeding the world’s burger appetite with Impossible Burger and other alternatives is a good thing because we need to curtail the greenhouse emissions from cows, we desperately need to save water that is used in raising cows, we need to discourage animal cruelty, and we need to forge paths of feeding the world with sources that can accommodate our planet’s population explosion. 

Sample Thesis #3

Since animal cruelty and attacking our environment for the sake of beef burgers are both unacceptable, we have to find a powerful marketing campaign to make plant-based burgers a viable replacement for meat. We can and must do this by making plant-based burgers cool in terms of elevated social status, macho in terms of appealing to “the Joe Rogan bros,” and affordable so that the regular consumer can buy what are now overpriced vegan burgers. Looking at the effective vegan propaganda in the documentary The Game Changers, featuring professional fighter James Wilks, is an effective model for this marketing campaign.  

Sample Thesis #4

The claim that we should rely on “powerful marketing” to appeal to “Joe Rogan bros” is an absurdity that makes a mockery of a critical thinking class’ Three Pillars of Argumentation, logos, ethos, and pathos. It is illogical to promote a processed burger soggy with canola oil and sodium, thus a violation of logos. It is not credible to reference the slick albeit highly flawed propaganda piece The Game Changers, thus a violation of ethos. It is demoralizing to promote processed foods as a substitute for succulent beef burgers, thus a violation of pathos.

Sample Thesis #5

That we should encourage plant-based burgers using similar rhetorical strategies in The Game Changers is not at all a violation of The Three Pillars of Argumentation. To the contrary, making more powerful branding can indeed be performed while adhering to the topnotch pillars of ethos, logos, and pathos. It is logical to pave ways of alternative proteins to meat as animal products can no longer meet the demands of the world’s growing human population, thus logos. It is credible to find ways to provide plant-based burgers that offer more protein than their beef counterparts, thus ethos. It is inspiring and ethically sound to find plant-based proteins to spare the torture that is inflicted on cows and other animals, thus pathos. 

Sample Outline for Frankenstein Patty Essay Assignment

Paragraph 1, your introduction, explain in the context of Tad Friend’s essay why there is an intense race with millions of dollars being invested, in replacing meat burgers with vegan burgers. This race is for money, saving the environment, and relieving animals of cruelty. Elaborate on these issues. 

Paragraph 2, your thesis, stake a claim on the viability of plant-protein burgers. 

Paragraphs 3-5 are your supporting reasons for your claim or thesis.

Paragraph 6 is your counterargument-rebuttal in which you address your opponents’ objections to your argument.

Paragraph 7, your conclusion, is a powerful restatement of your thesis.

Your last page is your MLA Works Cited page with a minimum of 2 sources. 

Choice B

Read Elizabeth Anderson’s “If God Is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?” and defend, refute, or complicate the author’s claim that non-religious societies offer a superior moral framework for human evolution than religious societies.  

Sample Outline

Paragraph 1, your introduction, write a profile of someone you know who demonstrates strong morals and put this person in a religious or non-religious framework.

Paragraph 2, transition from your profile to your claim or thesis in which your defend or refute Elizabeth Anderson's claim that religion is not only not necessary for morality but actually an impediment to morality.

Paragraphs 3-6: your supporting paragraphs

Paragraph 7: your counterargument-rebuttal. 

Paragraph 8, your conclusion, a powerful restatement of your thesis. 

Sample Thesis Statements

Supporting Elizabeth Anderson

Philosophy professor Elizabeth Anderson makes a persuasive case that flourishing secular societies develop superior morality to religious ones because secular societies rely on universal or common law to implement justice, not prejudicial religious law, which may or may not exact justice (for example, most religious texts encourage slavery, sexism, and homophobia), because religions have so much toxic baggage contained in their doctrine the only way their believers can market their faith as savory is by cherry-picking passages, emphasizing the good lines and "back-pedaling" the bad ones; and finally, secular societies are better positioned to encourage virtue for its own sake rather than push heaven and hell incentives, which are primitive and childish methods for encouraging moral behavior. 

Refuting Elizabeth Anderson

Philosophy professor Elizabeth Anderson's attempt to make the claim that secular societies provide superior morality to religious ones collapses under her misguided view of religion in which she distorts the essence of religious belief; her failure to see that secular societies only provide the most superficial morality for a semblance of order while failing to address the wickedness and urgent need for salvation in the hearts of humanity; her failure to see that adhering to secular society norms is no morality at all but rather conformity to civilizations that emphasize worldliness, not spiritual sacrifice, as the human ideal; and her failure to see that religious values are far more universal than secular ones, which often clash depending on which part of the world they arise. 

Mini Essay That Refutes Both Atheist Elizabeth Anderson and Religious Arguments for Morality

Atheists like Elizabeth Anderson and religious people like William Lane Craig who claim to have the answer to morality are both wrong. 

In fact, morality is such a rare thing and is practiced with such impotence and futility in the face of immorality that for all intents and purposes morality does not exist at all. 

Non-religious evangelist Elizabeth Anderson claims that secular societies create morality through “reciprocal claim making,” but this is no morality at all; it is rather a sort of moral minimalism in which people test the boundaries of doing what they can get away with as long as people don’t make claims against them. This is not morality or even decency. This is conforming to society’s laws only when one feels that to fail to do so will have unpleasant consequences. 

Religious people, too, are wrong about morality, claiming that religion is the only source of goodness and morality. On the contrary, religion usually doesn’t make people moral. People are either good or bad, and then they use religion to exacerbate whatever preconditions roil inside them. A good person will use religion to exercise the goodness that is already there. But a jackass before finding religion is usually still a jackass after his religious conversion. Both strident atheists and religious zealots can be bullies and jerks. 

Finally, people who claim to be religious only do so at the service of convenience. If their faith is tested so that they must carry their Cross to use courage, self-denial, and sacrifice to live their faith, they usually fail to do so. The atheist vegan and the religious crusader who are both fully committed to their cause are rare breeds and owe their commitment, not to their atheist or religious ideology, but to their innate psychological hard-wiring. 

To recap, most people are indecent, most people are unchanging since birth regardless of their ideology, most people put convenience over their ideals, and most people only behave as morally as they are forced to do so, engaging in a sort of moral minimalism, which is so pathetic as to not be deserved to be called morality at all. 

Therefore, I am neither swayed by atheist Elizabeth Anderson or Christian William Lane Craig. Both are blinded by their respective ideologies and eager to push their beliefs while conveniently ignoring the moral depravity I’ve accurately and cogently described. Nor have Anderson or Craig  refuted any of my trenchant points in the slightest. Their arguments are so flimsy, trivial, and misguided that I found this entire exercise of rebuking them rather boring, and I am now prepared to take a long nap.  God, I can't wait till I graduate college, when I'll no longer have to submit to this insufferable torture and bull-crap. 

Choice C

Develop a thesis about the power of manipulation and deception of Harari's notion of Imagined Reality by addressing the fraud evident in the Netflix documentary Fyre (Links to an external site.). 

Paragraph 1: We will define cognitive revolution according YNH. 

Paragraph 2: We will write a thesis similar to this: The Netflix documentary Fyre shows how the Cognitive Revolution creates imagined realities that work in the service of hucksters, hacks, sociopaths, and mountebanks who can spin an imagined reality or narrative resulting in mass manipulation, self-deception, a quest for status, and _______________________. 

Paragraphs 3-5: Your body paragraphs will support the above thesis mapping components. 

Paragraph 6: Counterargument-rebuttal.

Paragraph 7: Conclusion, powerful restatement of your thesis. 

Another Sample Thesis for Choice C (Netflix documentary Fyre)

The colossal  ****show so splendidly rendered in the Netflix documentary Fyre is largely the result of Groupthink evidenced by _______________, ______________, ______________________, and ___________________. 

Choice D

Support, refute, or complicate Harari’s assertion that the “agricultural revolution was the greatest crime against humanity.”  

You need minimum 2 sources for your MLA Works Cited page.

Sample Thesis and Outline

 

Harari makes a persuasive case that the AR is inferior to the Forager Age evidenced by __________________, ________________, ____________________, and ______________________. 

 

Paragraph 1: Introduction explains the differences between foragers and inhabitants of the AR.

Paragraph 2: Thesis or claim

Paragraphs 3-6: Supporting paragraphs

Paragraph 7: Counterargument-rebuttal

Paragraph 8: Conclusion is powerful restatement of thesis

Sample Counterargument and Conclusion

While I love Sapiens as a life-altering book on how I regard the human race, where we came from, where we are today, and where we are going, I am not totally drinking the Noah Yuval Harari Kool-Aid. I in fact agree with those critics who observe that Harari commits a sort of implied Noble Savage Fallacy by suggesting that pre-agriculture society was vastly superior to the evils evident in a post-agricultural state. Ruthless tyrants indeed flourished in the Agriculture Age, but evil “shot-callers” have always been with us. Any microsociety has an Alpha who dominates the others. Where I agree with Harari is that the Agriculture Age scaled this evil because agriculture resulted in a population explosion. 

Secondly, it is too late to fret over our morbidly obese, tooth-decayed post-Forager condition. The Genie is out of the bottle, so to speak. Rather than long to run through jungles in animal skins with our ripped bodies, we need to look at how we might flourish in a world sodden with mono-crops and a growing appetite for mass-produced animal flesh. Here, Harari argues that that A.I. might navigate us out of our self-destruction if we don’t kill ourselves first. 

In sum, Harari’s Sapiens is a masterpiece, an unflinching critique of our violent and irrational appetites, our grand imagination, and our drive for dominance, which may or may not spell our demise. 

Counterarguments: Noble Savage Myth

Possible counterarguments in Quillette: “Romanticizing the Hunter-Gatherer” by William Buckner

A related criticism is in Will Day-Brosnan's book review: 

Elsewhere, I wondered the extent to which Harari was projecting an idealistic (even Rousseauian) vision of a noble savage on pre-state peoples. His depiction of a foraging lifestyle (‘A Day in the Life of Adam and Eve’) unencumbered by the complexities and worries of civilisational living could be read as reactionary atavism. In this section, the bibliography and citations are also problematic, Harari makes claims for which it is difficult to trace a source. For example, he affirms that ‘loneliness and privacy were rare [amongst hunter gatherers]’; that the human population ‘was smaller than that of today’s Cairo’; that the ‘average ancient forager could turn a flint stone into a spear point within minutes’; and that ‘hunter gatherers living today… work on average for just thirty five to forty five hours a week’ (52-6). If sources for these claims exist, they are very difficult to correlate with the text.