Please read the attachment files.
Critical Thinking – Argument Reconstruction
Write a paper on the arguments below. Your paper should:
Begin with a very brief summary of the argument.
Reconstruct the argument into standard form: make sure your reconstruction is well-formed.
For each line in your argument, note whether it is a premise or, if it is a conclusion, indicate which premises it follows from. You don’t need to mention which pattern is being followed.
Give a brief defense of each premise. You should aim for your defense for each premise to be no more than a paragraph of text in length.
You might find some premises that you think are obvious. If you really cannot come up with a further defense, explain why you think the premise is obvious.
Choose one premise and object to it. You should aim for your objection to be no more than a paragraph of text in length.
SITCOMS
“Almost every sitcom from 20+ years ago are full of racism and homophobia. I think we should just stop watching them. Honestly, whenever people talk about how good old sitcoms are, I get pretty mad. Why would anyone watch something that is so likely to be full of garbage messages?”
GRADING RUBRIC:
If a reconstruction is both valid and accurate, the grade range is B to A+.
If a reconstruction is valid and not accurate, the grade range is C+ to B+
If a reconstruction is accurate but not valid, the grade range is C to B
If a reconstruction is neither valid nor accurate, the grade range is D to C+.
Where in the grade range? This depends on (in order of priority):
How adequate the defenses of the premises are.
How adequate the objection is.
1. For the defenses of premises:
If the premises is an “if…then” claim: did they assume the if part and then tried to show that the “then” part follows?
If the premises is an “all” or “most” claim: did they defend it by giving (a) a definition of A and B, or (b) a list of As that are Bs, or (c) a source?
For the remaining premises: was the evidence in their defense relevant to the premise?
2. For the objection:
Did the student object to a premise rather than the conclusion?
Did the student correctly identify which premise they were objecting to?
