<\/p>\n
Using the two scenarios below, apply the below 4 steps in a paper of 600-800 words per scenario<\/u>. <\/strong><\/p>\n Evaluate <\/strong>each argument, using the four-step process described on pp. 197-198, regarding soundness of reasoning (truth and validity).<\/p>\n Explain <\/strong>your assessment, and add alternative argumentation where necessary.<\/p>\n Format <\/strong>your assignment according to appropriate course level APA guidelines<\/p>\n References <\/strong>must be provided.<\/p>\n 2 Scenarios<\/strong><\/u><\/p>\n 1) The credit card habit promotes careless spending, particularly among young people. Therefore, credit card companies should not be permitted to issue credit cards to anyone under age 21.<\/p>\n 2) Drug dealing should not be a crime because it does not directly harm others or force them to harm themselves.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n <\/u><\/p>\n 4 Step Process<\/strong><\/u><\/p>\n 1)State 2) Examine each part of your argument for errors affecting truth. <\/span>3) Examine your argument for validity errors; that is, consider the 4) If you find one or more errors, revise your argument to Using the two scenarios below, apply the below 4 steps in a paper of 600-800 words per scenario. Evaluate each argument, using the four-step process described on pp. 197-198, regarding soundness of reasoning (truth and validity). Explain your assessment, and add alternative argumentation where necessary. Format your assignment according to appropriate course level APA guidelines […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_joinchat":[]},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268145"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=268145"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268145\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=268145"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=268145"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qualityassignments.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=268145"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<\/strong><\/u><\/p>\n
<\/strong><\/u><\/p>\n
<\/strong><\/u><\/p>\n
<\/strong><\/u><\/p>\n
\nyour argument fully, as clearly as you can. Be sure to identify any hidden
\npremises and, if the argument is complex, to express all parts of it.<\/p>\n
\n(To be sure your examination is not perfunctory, play devil\u2019s advocate and<\/span> <\/span>challenge<\/i><\/span> <\/span>the argument, asking pointed questions about it, taking nothing
\nfor granted.) Note any instances of either\/or thinking, avoiding the issue,
\novergeneralizing, oversimplifying, double standard, shifting the burden of
\nproof, or irrational appeal. In addition, check to be sure that the argument
\nreflects the evidence found in your investigation and is relevant to the pro
\nand con arguments and scenarios you produced earlier.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nreasoning that links conclusions to premises. Determine whether your conclusion
\nis legitimate or illegitimate.<\/p>\n
\neliminate them. The changes you will have to make in your argument will depend
\non the kinds of errors you find. Sometimes, only minor revision is called
\nfor\u2014the adding of a simple qualification, for example, or the substitution of a
\nrational appeal for an irrational one. Occasionally, however, the change
\nrequired is more dramatic. You may, for example, find your argument so flawed
\nthat the only appropriate action is to abandon it altogether and embrace a
\ndifferent argument. On those occasions, you may be tempted to<\/span> <\/span>pretend<\/i><\/span> <\/span>your argument is sound and hope no one will notice the errors.
\nResist that hope. It is foolish as well as dishonest to invest time in refining
\na view that you know is unsound.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"