Recent orders

Week 2 Discussion: Evidence-Based Arguments

Week 2 Discussion: Evidence-Based Arguments

.

Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:

  • Textbook: Chapter 3, 4
  • Minimum of 1 scholarly source

Initial Post InstructionsPhilosophy Paper.


Evidence-based practice requires…evidence. The careful collection of evidence is the first job of every medical practitioner, not least the nurse, who has the most extensive and intimate contact with the patient. However, it does not stop with the nurse. Whatever your role – social worker, hospital administration, human services – whether your problem is the allocation of scarce resources, where to add or cut staff, or the treatment plan for a patient, you will need to present and defend your position in a clearly structured argument

For this discussion, address the following:

  • Explain how applying the methods of analyzing an argument can help you make and win your point.
  • As you collect and prepare to present your evidence-based argument, how might diagramming your findings be helpful in clearly and accurately conveying your findings?
  • Provide an example of how you might diagram your findings.

Follow-Up Post Instructions
Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.

Writing Requirements

  • Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up)
  • APA format for in-text citations and list of references

Grading
This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:

Course Outcomes (CO): 2

Due Date for Initial Post: By 11a.m. EST on Wednesday

Search entries or author Filter replies by unreadUnread     Collapse replies Expand replies

 Subscribe

 ReplyReply to Week 2 Discussion: Evidence-Based Arguments

Collapse SubdiscussionRussell Waltz

Manage Discussion Entry

Opening Post

Hello Class,

Welcome to Week 2! You may begin posting on Day 1, which is Monday, for credit. This week, we will be discussing the difference between providing an explanation and providing an argument. Along with your textbook reading for the week, here is an additional reading to consider for this week’s discussion:

Archie, L. (2004). Diagramming arguments. Retrieved December 26, 2018, from https://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/diagram.html

Discussion Prompt:

Explain how applying the methods of analyzing an argument can help you make and win your point. As you collect and prepare to present your evidence-based argument, how might diagramming your findings be helpful in clearly and accurately conveying your findings? Provide an example of how you might diagram your findings.

Remember to use an outside resource in the main post, which needs to be on or before Wednesday. Don’t forget to look over the discussion rubric as a reference when you are writing your discussion posts. If you have any questions, please post in the Q&A forum or email me. Let’s get started!

Please remember to take note of the Discussion Grading Guidelines.

This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:

  • Hello everyone,
  • Please be sure on the assignment that is due this week to present a diagram of your findings. This is best done in MS Word. Sometimes I will create a diagram in MS Word and take a screenshot of it so that I can post it as a picture file. Please see the example below.
  • An example of an argument diagram is as follows.
  • Typically, argument diagrams have arrows with the premises leading to the conclusion. For example, Archie (2004) shows that:
  • References
  • Archie, L. (2004). Diagramming arguments. Retrieved December 26, 2018, from https://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/diagram.html

Philosophy Paper.

Are mental states identical to physical processes? Explain the disagreement between two philosophers while arguing for your thesis; one who says yes, one who says no.  Philosophers who say yes are Smart and Churchland, philosophers who say no are Gertler and Nagel.

Format: Papers must be 4-6 pages, have 1 inch margins, and be in 12pt Times New Roman font, double spaced, with no extra spaces between paragraphs.  Please insert page numbers into your document.  You may choose either: APA, Chicago, or MLA style for citations.  Turn in an MS Word document through the Moodle site (this uses the software Turnitin, which automatically checks for plagiarism) and bring a paper copy to class.

Organization: The paper should have three parts, listed below (no need for headings though). THIS IS SUPER IMPORTANT !!!!

Introduction:  This is typically the first paragraph.  Longer papers (10 pages and over) may have an introductory section made up of a few paragraphs.

·      In this section, you present to the reader the issue or debate your paper will address.  You will also state explicitly the position you will defend and how you will defend it. 

·      Even though this is the first paragraph the reader reads, it is often the last paragraph the writer writes or rewrites.  The reason for this is simple:  the introduction is supposed to present the reader with a bird’s eye view of the whole paper, but sometimes you will not have a clear picture of the whole paper until after you have finished it.

Development:  This is the main body of your paper, and it consists of all the paragraphs after the “Introduction” and before the “Conclusion.” 

·      Part 1:  To start off the development section of your paper, you will explain the background or context of the issue or debate of your paper.  To do this, you need to describe two different philosopher’s views.

·      Part 2:  After initiating the development, you will actually work on the development.  This consists of presenting your own argument about the issues.

·      Part 3:  In this section you will defend your argument by considering possible counterarguments and offering a reply.

Conclusion:  In this section, you explain to the reader what your paper accomplished.  You may want to hint at some future questions for research that your paper did not answer or draw a larger moral from the discussion.

Here is what our professor expects from a typical paper :

1. Start your paper with a fact or a story, not a generalization.

            e.g. “Descartes believes that the mind and body are separate.” Or “In 2011 a computer system named Watson beat both Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter on the game show Jeopardy!”  NOT “People have argued about the mind since the beginning of time.”  Avoid talking about the past like this, it is too general.

2. Show why an argument is bad; don’t just say that it is bad.

            e.g. “Turing holds that thinking is simply a matter of acting as if you are thinking.  But usually we make a distinction between acting as if you are in some mental state and actually being in that mental state.”  NOT simply “Turing’s argument is hard to believe.”

3. Do not argue from authority.

            e.g. “Thinking is a matter of neural networks connecting, according to Science magazine.”  It doesn’t matter who said this, in your paper you must give reasons for the claims you are making, so if you want to quote an outside source in this manner you must tell us the reasons that Science magazine says that thinking is a matter of neural networks connecting.   The fact that someone said this is not reason enough to believe it, even if that someone is a famous philosopher.

4. Do not rely entirely on empirical claims.

            e.g. “Studies show that depressed people have low levels of serotonin, therefore depression is identical to the physical state of low seratonin.”  This claim, if properly cited, can be used in a paper.  But a scientific study cannot be your only argument for your thesis.  You must say something more.

Short Answer: Choosing Your Artifact

After reviewing the requirements for Project 1 and Project 2, propose two or three artifacts that you are considering using as a basis for your projects.

Consider the following questions before stating your selections. You do not need to answer all of these questions, but they may guide you in choosing potential artifacts and providing a rationale for your choices.

  • In your thinking about the disciplines of the humanities (visual arts, literature, philosophy, and the performing arts), is there are piece of art, music, architecture, or literature that you would be interested in learning more about?
  • Is there an object associated with one of the cultures you belong to that is particularly meaningful to you?Is the artifact created or worked on by a human being? (If you answered no, it is not an artifact.)
  • Does it have a primarily functional or practical purpose? (If you answered yes, it is not an artifact.)
  • Does it embody the creative expression of ideas? (If you answered yes, it is an artifact. If you answered no, it is not an artifact.)

Identify two to three artifacts you are interested in studying for Project 1. In two to three sentences, provide a rationale for choosing the artifacts as potential options for your project.

This activity will be graded based on completion.