Assignment 11: Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Part I Pr 187701

Assignment 11 Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Part Iprewritingdue Wee

Assignment 1.1: Conflicting Viewpoints Essay - Part I Prewriting Due Week 3 and worth 30 points When looking for information about a particular issue, how often do you try to resist biases toward your own point of view? This assignment asks you to engage in this aspect of critical thinking by playing the "Believing Game." The Believing Game is about making the effort to "believe" - or at least consider - the reasons for an opposing view on an issue. The assignment is divided into two (2) parts. In Part I of the assignment (due Week 3), you will first read a book excerpt about critical thinking processes: "The Believing Game and How to Make Conflicting Opinions More Fruitful." Next, you will review the Procon.org Website in order to gather information. Then, you will engage in prewriting to examine your thoughts. Note: In Part II of the assignment (due Week 5), you will write an essay geared towards synthesizing your ideas.

Part I - Prewriting: Follow the instructions below for this prewriting activity. Use complete sentences and adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling. Select one (1) of the approved topics from the Website and state your position on the issue. From the Procon.org Website, identify three (3) premises (reasons) listed under either the Pro or Con section—whichever section opposes your position. For each of the three (3) premises (reasons) that oppose your position, answer these "believing" questions suggested by Elbow: What's interesting or helpful about this view? What would I notice if I believed this view? In what sense or under what conditions might this idea be true? The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized writing: Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph. Address main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences. Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: This course requires use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The format is different than other Strayer University courses. Please take a moment to review the SWS documentation for details. This prewriting assignment has no page requirement. There is no requirement at this time to include references in the assignment.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: identify the informal fallacies, assumptions, and biases involved in manipulative appeals and abuses of language; create written work utilizing the concepts of critical thinking; use technology and information resources to research issues in critical thinking skills and informal logic.

Paper For Above instruction

The practice of critical thinking necessitates actively challenging one’s biases and preconceived notions to arrive at a more balanced understanding of contentious issues. In this prewriting phase, I will select a topic from Procon.org that presents a clear opposition to my stance. The chosen issue is [insert issue], for which I hold a definite position. I will examine three premises from the opposing side, aiming to understand not only their reasoning but also the potential validity and helpfulness of their arguments through the "believing" questions.

The first premise from the opposing viewpoint states that [insert premise]. This argument seems compelling because [explain why it might be interest or helpful]. If I believed this premise, I would notice [explain what I might notice], and under certain conditions, this idea might be true because [explain when or how it might be true]. Recognizing this premise helps me appreciate the complexity of the issue and encourages me to consider alternate perspectives objectively.

The second premise challenges my stance by asserting that [insert premise]. Its intriguing aspect is that [explain importance or helpfulness of this view]. Believing this would make me notice [describe observation], and it is plausible under circumstances such as [explain conditions]. This understanding prompts me to evaluate my views critically and understand the strength of opposing arguments.

The third premise I will analyze from the opposing side claims that [insert premise]. This premise is interesting because [discuss why it’s compelling or helpful]. If I were to believe it, I might notice [what I might observe], and it could be true when [explain conditions], which broadens my perspective on the issue. Engaging with these premises through the "believing" questions allows me to develop a more nuanced view and prepares me for the synthesis in my subsequent essay.

References

• Elbow, P. (2000). Writing with Power: Techniques for Mastering the Writing Process. Oxford University Press.
• Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life. Pearson.
• Procon.org. (2024). [Specific topic URL]
• Facione, P. A. (2015). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assessments.
• Kuhn, D. (2019). Education and the development of critical thinking. Educational Psychology Review, 31(1), 97–115.
• Facione, N. C. (2011). Think Critically. California Academic Press.
• Norris, S. (2011). Trusting our instincts? An analysis of experiential and analytical thinking. In S. Norris & M. Spencer (Eds.), Cognitive Perspectives on Critical Thinking (pp. 91–110). Routledge.
• Siegel, H. (1988). Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking, and Education. Routledge.
• Ennis, R. H. (2018). Critical Thinking across the Curriculum: A Guide to Developing Critical Thinking Skills. Routledge.
• Williams, M., & Paul, R. (2015). Critical Thinking: Think Critically to Make Better Decisions. Pearson.