PHL 111 FInal Project

docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

111

Subject

Arts Humanities

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

8

Uploaded by CaptainSnail3435

Report
1 Final Project Leha Hislop Southern New Hampshire University PHL- 111: Introduction to Critical Thinking Instructor: Dr. Skye December 10, 2023
2 Final Project I. Introduction : The topic I chose is Marijuana: Beneficial or Harmful? This is a debate that goes on daily with scientists trying to figure out which one marijuana could be for individuals. Many individuals use marijuana to medicate for their symptoms of cancer or epilepsy among other issues. Others use recreational and some overuse recreational marijuana. Due to marijuana being only legal in 33 states and the District of Columbia it is difficult to test the actual use and effects of marijuana on a person's mind. They are unable to get a clear picture of how THC and CBD can differ and affect the thinking process. Some tests come back that marijuana has a negative impact on thinking and others come back that it can enhance the thinking process. I have a personal connection to this topic due to the father of my children having epilepsy and using marijuana to help treat his condition. We currently reside in the state of Pennsylvania, and we have a bill passed for medical marijuana use. The use of medical marijuana does help to control his seizures and give him an appetite after he has a seizure. II. Primary Argument: The primary argument in the article ‘Cannabis in the Clinic’ is how they are unable to test cannabis and its effects on the human brain due to the limitations of marijuana being labeled as a Schedule 1 drug classification. They are unable to get the proper data they need because they don’t know a person's use of marijuana. Data on how marijuana works in people over time are sparse (Walter, 2020). The first premise I see is “But a 2018
3 clinical study on medical marijuana users showed very different effects on the brain” (Walter, 2020). Each time a study was conducted they came to different conclusions. The second premise I see in this article is “Marijuana use is skyrocketing among the elderly — reports have suggested it has increased as much as tenfold among seniors over the past decade” (Walter, 2020). The fact that they use it to treat many different illnesses and diagnoses for all ages of people. The conclusion “The bottom line is this: Research on marijuana remains inconclusive. Results differ from person to person, depending on why and how they use the drug.” (Walter, 2020). Everyone is different so results may vary between tests. The logic and reasoning behind the testing of marijuana is simple to explain. It is an inductive argument because they are trying to test and figure out how marijuana affects a person’s ability to think while high. The tests all have factors that come into play as to whether the person is using marijuana for medical purposes or recreationally using marijuana. I believe the argument is valid that there is no way to prove if marijuana has a negative or positive effect on people. Until they can legalize it everywhere they cannot test the drugs supplied on the streets and are limited to the medically used marijuana for testing. 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.
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 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. III. Counterargument:
5 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 Smokescreen 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. The claim being made is marijuana is harmful for consumption of use. The first premise is “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). The second premise is “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). The conclusion is “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). Marijuana is not safe for human consumption. The logic and reasoning behind choosing this counterargument is 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
6 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. 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. IV. Application: It was a process that took me week by week to write this argument and understand how to properly do it. I had to consider how accurate my argument would be against my counterargument. How valid is my argument and are there any biases presented in the article, I had to ask myself. I read through the article and did a little research on the author of the article to see how credible the article is. Being that I deal with someone who has a medical condition and uses marijuana to treat his epilepsy it was easy to analyze the strength of the argument. I will apply the process of critical thinking to my everyday life more often now. It helps to look at the bigger picture and see the two sides to each story instead of just seeing one dimension. I will look more for the reasoning behind the argument and easy ways to solve it to make everyone happy, if possible. I will try to make sure I do not form any biases or judgments against anything or anyone. We first look at the facts and then make
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
7 sure to do our own research on the evidence provided to us. After taking these steps I expect to be a good critical thinker.
8 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