Please Only Serious Inquiries Part 2 Assignment First

Please Only Serious Inquiries Only 2 Part Assignment First One Due F

Please only serious inquiries only. 2 part assignment, first one due Friday and second part I need by Sunday. I will post the instructions. 1. Step 3: Mapping the Debate Week 3 Summary/Objectives: This week, you will learn how to assess the different positions on an issue by mapping the debate. Remember: with any argument, it is important to understand that there are multiple perspectives within any given issue. Your goal is to uncover those positions, how they talk to one another, and the underlying motivations that impact them. Of course, as you build up your own argument, it's important to not only realize where your own position lies within the conversation, but to also understand what motivates your own position. Week 3 Assignments: Peer Workshop Step 1: Essay draft to Smarthinking due by day 3 Mapping the Debate for Argument Paper assignment Peer Workshop Step 2: Tutor comments and discussion (draft due by day 3; peer responses due by day). The next step in the process of writing your first paper is to put stasis theory into practice by using the stasis questions (Does it exist? How do you define it? Is it good or bad? What should we do about it?) to learn more about the controversial debates and conversations surrounding your chosen paper topics. After reviewing the materials on stasis theory, take a look at the mapping worksheet. Fill out the worksheet by putting the names of all the authors of your sources in the left-hand column. Then, write in each box how each author answers each of the stasis questions. Note: Because you are required to have 4-5 sources for the argument paper, you should have a minimum of 4 sources represented on this worksheet. (Keep in mind that it won’t be entirely clear sometimes how an author answers a question. Sometimes, you have to infer what the answer is, or read between the lines. For example, if they are trying to define a problem, that means they believe the problem exists even if they don’t outright say it.) In addition to filling in the mapping worksheet, answer these questions (minimum of one full paragraph): What did you learn about the debate from filling out the worksheet? Where do the participants disagree the most? Which of the participants do you agree with? Which do you disagree with? What sort of evidence do the authors give to support their claims? Which evidence is most compelling and convincing? What gaps exist in the conversation? In other words, are there any solutions, definitions, causes, etc that they are not suggesting that would help move the conversation forward? Below are links to the worksheet you must fill out and to a student example worksheet that's already filled out. Complete this handout on Stasis Theory Mapping. Completed Student Example of Stasis Theory Mapping Assignment.

Paper For Above instruction

The assignment requires students to engage in a comprehensive analysis of a controversial issue by mapping the debate through the lens of stasis theory. The core objective is to identify the different positions asserted by various authors, understand how they relate and respond to each other, and analyze the motivations behind their claims. This process entails constructing a detailed mapping worksheet that documents each author's stance on four fundamental questions of stasis: existence, definition, value judgment, and action recommendation. This exercise aims to deepen the student's critical understanding of the debate's landscape, reveal areas of disagreement, and identify potential gaps or overlooked solutions that could propel the conversation forward.

The task involves selecting four to five credible sources pertinent to the issue at hand. For each source, students are to analyze and infer responses to the four stasis questions, considering that some authors may not explicitly state their positions, thus requiring interpretative reading. Once the worksheet is completed, the student must reflect in a well-developed paragraph discussing insights gained from the exercise, including the main areas of contention, personal agreements and disagreements with the authors, the quality of evidence presented, and potential missing elements in the current discourse.

In summary, this assignment combines research, analytical reasoning, and reflective writing to critically evaluate the structure of the debate, laying a foundation for developing a well-informed argument in the subsequent paper. The overall goal is to foster a nuanced understanding of the controversy by mapping out the various positions, motivations, and underlying assumptions that shape the ongoing conversation.

References

• Blumenfeld, W. J. (2017). The Anatomy of Argument: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Routledge.
• Griffin, C. (2010). A First Look at Communication Theory. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Lunsford, A. A., & Ruszkiewicz, J. J. (2011). Everything's an Argument. Bedford/St. Martin's.
• Reed, C. (2018). Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Critical Thinkers. Routledge.
• Rieke, R. & Sillars, M. (2001). Argumentation and Critical Decision Making. Longman.
• Toulmin, S. (2003). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
• Willard, K. (2004). Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric. Bedford/St. Martin's.
• Walton, D. (2008). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge University Press.
• Johnson, R. H. (2000). The Elements of Reasoning. McGraw-Hill.
• Kennedy, G. (2010). Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition. University of North Carolina Press.