PHL 111 Module 5 Counterargument
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
111
Subject
Arts Humanities
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by CaptainSnail3435
1
Module Five: Milestone Two: Counterargument
Leha Hislop
Southern New Hampshire University
PHL- 111: Introduction to Critical Thinking
Instructor: Dr. Skye
November 24, 2023
2
Module Five: Milestone Two: Counterargument
II.
Primary Argument:
Explore the position advanced in your Primary Article.
The primary argument of my article is whether marijuana is beneficial or harmful for
consumption. The argument I chose to write about is how it can be beneficial for
consumption if used the right way. In the article, the author states the positive and
negative effects of marijuana usage on a person’s mental health.
D.
Bias:
Describe the bias or lack of bias in the article that you selected.
The article I chose does contain some biased statements in it, but it also
has some factual information. The article states that “the drug might be an
effective measure to treating chronic pain and chemotherapy side effects
like nausea, which could explain the climbing usage rates” (Walter, 2020).
It seems as if she leans more towards it, being good for medical purposes
but not recreational use.
E.
Credibility:
Assess the credibility of the overall argument (e.g., using the
CRAAP test).
While using the CRAAP test to find out if my article was sufficiently
credible, I was able to obtain information to support my paper. The
resources used to produce this article are credible because it was written
by a trustworthy organization called Gale Business. This article was
written to inform people of the use of marijuana by doing research that
supports its claims. I do believe this article is credible. The resources
support the article due to them being actual studies of the effects of
marijuana use on a person's mental health.
C.R.A.A.P Test
Currency: The currency of this article is March 2020, and the information
is up to date.
Relevance: This article is very relevant to my topic of how marijuana is
beneficial or harmful for a person to use. It talks about how marijuana
cannot be tested properly to find out the effects on one’s mental health.
Authority: The author is Jennifer Walter from Discover Media, and she has
written a few other articles for this same company.
Accuracy: The article has a tad bit of bias in it but not much. It states facts
from the references she inquired about for her information before
publishing her article.
3
Purpose: The purpose of this article is to inform people about the use of
marijuana and how it cannot be properly tested. It shows facts on how it is
still a Schedule 1 drug classification and how they are not able to test
street use of marijuana. They can only test the medical use of marijuana.
III.
Counterargument:
For my counterargument, the article I chose is
Anti-legalization
advocate opens window into harms of commercial marijuana
. This article speaks about
how they published a book in 2018 called S
mokescreen
which published stories from
people who experienced the commercial use of marijuana. It made some quit their jobs
because they ran out of business or the mismanagement of the licensing process.
A.
Argument Details:
The claim I am making is that marijuana use is harmful for
consumption of use.
Premises One:
“
Smokescreen
, Sabet says, gives voice to those who have witnessed the toll commercialization
has taken on drug users who are not protected from high‐potency marijuana and on low-
income communities that are disproportionately targeted by commercial marijuana enterprises”
(Enos, 2021).
Premises Two:
“A state regulator who ended up quitting her job, frustrated that she was constantly receiving
commercial license applications from individuals who had ties to criminal organizations (Enos,
2021).
Conclusion:
“Sabet hopes the book will help policymakers avoid some of the missteps government officials
have made in states that have legalized recreational marijuana (Enos, 2021).
B.
Logic and Reasoning:
I chose this counterargument because it is the opposite of what I
am arguing. I am arguing that marijuana is beneficial for use for medical purposes if used
properly. The only logical counterargument would be that marijuana is harmful for
consumption of use. When someone uses marijuana for commercial use it can affect all
different types of people individually. I would say this argument is deductive because it
refers to specific scenarios from people who experienced loss from marijuana in some
type of way. I would say this argument is valid because it gives real-life experiences from
another person’s perspective. I would say the weakness of this article is that because it
comes from another person’s perspective it contains some biases.
C.
Bias:
The counterargument does contain some biased statements because it is an article
about a book. It’s about people’s personal experiences behind the commercial use of
marijuana.
“Testimony from individuals whose loved ones suffered severe consequences from use
of a product that was sold as a relatively harmless substance” (Enos, 2021). Otherwise,
the article is informative about the book written about marijuana.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
References
Enos, G. (2021). Anti‐legalization advocate opens window into harms of commercial
marijuana.
Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly
,
33
(13), 1–8.
https://doi-
org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1002/adaw.33017
Walter, J. (2020, March 1). Cannabis in the Clinic.
Discover
,
41
(2).
https://eds-s-ebscohost-
com.ezproxy.snhu.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=592b231b-bd7a-49f0-bc60-
ebfbd880d222%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d
%3d#db=edsbig&AN=edsbig.A636283460