philosophy

PHIL347

Course Project: Topic Selection

Fill out the following on your topic selection. 1. My argument will provide reasons related to the following question:

___________________________

 2. ______My argument will support this claim as true; my answer to the question is “yes.”  

______My argument will not support this claim and will oppose this claim as false; my answer to the question is “No.” 

  3. Stated argumentatively, I think the three most important issues around this topic are:   (1) ___________________________ 

(2) ___________________________ 

(3) ___________________________ 

State the issues argumentatively–that means a question that could be answered with a yes or no answer. 

· For example: “Should we defund the police?”   not “Why should we defund the police.” 

Make sure the question is argumentative.

· For example: “Is Springfield the capital of Illinois?” is not an argumentative question because there is only one possible answer. “Should we move the capital of Illinois to Chicago?” is an argumentative question. 

Examples of the three issues:   

1. Will the costs of providing free healthcare to undocumented persons be prohibitively high? 

2. Do we have a moral obligation to provide healthcare to those who have sought shelter within our borders? 

3. Is the public health of the nation vulnerable to the health of undocumented persons, specifically by those with communicable diseases such as tuberculosis and by unvaccinated persons? 

This week you will work on a paper that addresses a current controversial issue. This paper is to be in the form of an argument. You will select a topic, choose an issue related to that topic, thoroughly research both sides of the issue, and then write a paper that supports one side or the other of the issue. Your paper must define the issue, present evidence on both sides of the issue, and then argue that one side is stronger and more persuasive than the other. Your paper must address at least three to five relevant aspects of the issue

Here is a brief breakdown of the project so that you can plan your time in the course

CHOOSE ONE FROM FOLLOWING QUESTIONS FOR THIS PROJECT

1. Beyond prohibiting texting while driving, should cellphone use in schools and public places also be regulated? 

2. Should nurse practitioners be able to practice independently of and without the supervision of physicians? 

3. Should there be a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently residing in the U.S.? 

4. Should mandatory national service be required? (Serving in the military or working on civilian projects such as teaching in low-income areas, helping care for the elderly, maintaining infrastructure, etc.) 

B

Week Discussion

Opening Remarks

This week, we delve into the complexities of understanding and responding to viewpoints vastly different from our own, especially those we might find deeply objectionable. Engaging critically and empathetically with diverse perspectives is a crucial skill for personal and professional growth.

We will explore the following key areas:

· The nature and basis of various controversial viewpoints

· Strategies for responding to repugnant views as a critical thinker

· The qualitative differences between different controversial viewpoints

· The role of cognitive bias and fallacies of relevance in shaping these views

Resources

Bassham, G., Irwin, W., Nardone, H., & Wallace, J. M. (2022).  Critical thinking: A students introduction (7th ed.). McGraw Hill Education

To get started, please review Chapter 3 of your textbook and the lesson for this week. Additionally, ensure you reference at least one scholarly source in your posts.

Consider the following viewpoints:

· A misogynist's perspective

· A racist's perspective

· The belief that marriage is only between one man and one woman

· The belief that humans are not contributing to climate change

· The denial of the Holocaust

Reflect on how these views are qualitatively different or similar. Are some more alike than others? How does the institution of marriage differ from the concept of race? How does the science of climate change vary from the historical facts of the Holocaust?

1. A critical thinker listens to others and attempts to understand their point of view. Consider these points of view: 

1. the point of view of a misogynist—a person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against women

2. the point of view of a racist

3. the point of view of someone who believes marriage is only between one man and one woman

4. the point of view of someone who does not believe that humans are contributing to the conditions that cause climate change

5. the point of view of someone who denies that the Holocaust occurred

They represent five points of view about vastly different topics. Are they also qualitatively different? Or are some more alike than others, and are some quite different? How, if at all, does the institution of marriage differ from the concept of race? How, if at all, does the science of climate change differ from the facts of the Holocaust? Note that although these are vastly different topics, Topics 1 and 2 have a similar basis, as do Topics 4 and 5, while the basis for Topic 3 is unlike either pair.   

How would you respond to someone expressing such views? How does a critical thinker respond to a viewpoint which he or she may find deeply repugnant? 

Is there a qualitative difference between believing some races are inferior and the belief that marriage should only be between one man and one woman? Is there a qualitative difference between not believing in human contribution to climate change and not believing in the Holocaust? 

pick  two of the viewpoints stated in the Introduction section.

1. With respect to just  one of the views you chose, discuss:

· How would you respond to someone expressing such a view?  

· How does a critical thinker respond to a viewpoint that he or she may find deeply repugnant? 

2. Also, look at both of the views you chose. Examine them based on these questions: Are the two viewpoints qualitatively different? Does the qualitative difference among them change the way in which you would listen to and respond to such views? Should it?   

· State if you have argued your position using inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, or both, and explain why you believe this. If inductive, point out your observations. If deductive, specify the principle, rule, or value that you have reasoned down from.