Week 2 Assingment
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Delaware County Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
103
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by DoctorDovePerson635
Step 1
: State a thesis statement on your topic.
This thesis statement does not have to end up being your final
position on the subject, but for this workshop, it will serve as the
position you will be defending. Your thesis statement is the
conclusion of your argument.
Example: If my topic is the moral acceptability of capital
punishment, my thesis could be that capital punishment is not
morally acceptable.
Step 2
: Present your main reason or reasons in favor of your thesis.
These reasons are the premises of your argument. State your
argument in standard form.
Example: If my thesis is that capital punishment is not morally
acceptable, and my reason is that it sometimes kills innocent
human beings, then my argument would be the following:
o
Premise 1: Capital punishment sometimes kills innocent
human beings.
o
Conclusion: Capital punishment is not morally acceptable.
Step 3
: State the new premise (or premises) that would be needed in order
to make this argument valid.
This new premise provides what is needed to link (in a valid way)
the first premise(s) to the stated conclusion. For more guidance on
how to do this, review the assigned sections of Chapter 3 in your
textbook, and watch the videos
What Is a Valid Argument?
Links to
an external site.
and
How to Make a Sound Deductive
Argument
Links to an external site.
.
In the above example, the new premise needed to make the
argument valid would be the following:
o
Premise 2: It is not morally acceptable to do anything that
sometimes kills innocent human beings.
The new premise connects the first premise to the conclusion in a
way that makes the argument logically valid.
Step 4
: Discuss whether the new premise is true (in your view) and why.
Does it have any counter examples? If it is not true (in your view),
then how could you modify it so that it is true but still supports the
conclusion? If it is true (in your view), how might you respond to a
likely objection to it?
In the example above, the new premise may not be true. A
counterexample could be
war
. Wars typically kill at least some
innocent human beings, but that does not make all of them morally
unacceptable.
To figure out how to modify the premise, one can ask the following:
What is the difference between good wars and capital punishment?
Perhaps it is that good wars are necessary to prevent greater
overall harm.
So, one might change the premise to, “It is not morally acceptable
to do anything that sometimes kills innocent human beings, unless
it is necessary to prevent greater overall harm.” This new version of
the premise shows what is wrong with capital punishment without
also entailing that war is always wrong.
Step 5
: State the new version of the argument in standard form, adding any
other premises needed to complete the reasoning (meaning to make it
valid).
The new argument becomes the following:
o
Premise 1: Capital punishment sometimes kills innocent
human beings.
Premise 2: It is not morally acceptable to do anything that
sometimes kills innocent human beings unless it is necessary to
prevent greater overall harm.
Premise 3: Capital punishment is not necessary to prevent greater
overall harm.
Conclusion: Capital punishment is not morally acceptable.
Step 6
: Discuss whether the new argument is deductively valid and whether
all of its premises are true.
If your argument meets both of these requirements (namely that it
is valid and all premises are true), then you have an apparently
sound argument; great job! If not, then go back to the steps above
and repeat until you have a sound argument and revise Step 5 until
it meets both requirements. (so that what you post under Step 5
above is your final, sound version).
Step 7
: Once you have an (apparently) sound argument, present an
objection to it.
Imagine for a moment that you are a smart person with the
opposite perspective on this issue. What would be your best
objection to the argument that you just gave? It can be an objection
to the truth of one of the premises or to the validity of the
reasoning, or it can be a counter argument intended to override
your argument. In any case, express here what you take that best
objection to be.
The Creating a Sound Argument Workshop paper,
Should be 1 to 2 pages in length.
Must include a separate title page with the following:
o
Title of workshop in bold font
Space should appear between the title and the
rest of the information on the title page.
o
Student’s name
o
Name of institution (University of Arizona Global Campus)
o
Course name and number
o
Instructor’s name
o
Due date
Step 1
Thesis: The United States should implement a single-payer system for health care.
Step 2:
Premise 1: The United States should do everything to take care of its citizens.
Conclusion: The United States should implement a single-payer system for health care.
Step 3:
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
Premise 2: The United States is one of only a few developed countries that does not have some form of
single-payer system for health care.
Step 4:
The new premise appears to be true. The reasoning for this is the position of the United States on the
world stage against the other countries that do not have a single-payer system. Anything that isn’t gold
standard reflects on our leadership of the world.
An objection could be raised as to how we are to pay for it. As most people do not want taxes to go up, it
would either have to be a tax on something or reduced spending to carve out room for this new
endeavor.
My response to this objection would be that in the light of the Great Depression, sweeping changes were
made at the federal level to lift everyone up out of where they were and everyone funded a new
endeavor called social security to secure our elderly people for their later years.
Step 5:
Premise 1:
The United States should do everything to take care of its citizens
Premise 2: Using the social security model, we can fund a single-payer system to help more of our
citizens.
Conclusion: The United States should implement a single-payer system.
Step 6:
The argument is valid.
Step 7:
The only argument here is that a single-payer system is not the only way to go. The government could
give vouchers to help its citizens. It could go after the insurance companies to force them to lower their
prices. It can set up it’s own network to compete with the insurance companies. There are a number of
ways to lower the cost of health care to citizens.