Portfolio Drexel University Critical Reasoning Philosophy 10

Portfolio Drexel University Critical Reasoning Philosophy 105 Pat

This document provides more information about the portfolio project and guidelines to complete each content area to the best of your ability. Use the information here and contained in the syllabus to answer initial questions you may have. And don’t forget to include citations for every piece of text you reference or use to help you formulate your own work. You can either include a short works cited/bibliography at the end of each content area, or one large works cited/bibliography encompassing all content areas. Any style is fine so long as it is consistent.

Meeting: You need to schedule a 30-minute meeting with me during the term. You should bring two content areas of your choosing with you for review. These need to be full first drafts, not merely ideas or notes. I will read as much as time permits to provide you feedback on how to improve these pieces of writing and approach the remaining content areas. I will also give you a sense of where you stand with your APC grade.

Fallacies: For the fallacies content area, you should find examples of fallacies committed in texts or videos. If all else fails, create a dialogue between different persons that represents fallacious arguments you have heard or in which you were personally involved. After providing the fallacy, you should identify the fallacy and then explain how this text, video, or dialogue commits this fallacy. Students usually complete this section in one of three ways: provide several examples with brief explanations, discuss fewer fallacies in more depth, or analyze fallacies in current issues.

Morals and Markets: Focus on at least two concrete cases or scenarios raised by Sandel's book. You should investigate and critique these cases, possibly incorporating light research to support your points. Do not merely repeat fallacies; instead, apply the concept of fallacies to real-world cases you select. Consider overarching questions about the relationship between market and non-market values, criteria for distinguishing cases, and potential solutions for upholding various values in a market-driven culture.

Op-Ed Analysis: Critically analyze a reputable opinion piece from a news source or magazine. Summarize the author's argument(s) charitably. Then respond by agreeing and providing additional support, agreeing but disagreeing with the reasons, or disagreeing and proposing an alternative conclusion. Focus less on summarizing and more on critical engagement.

Videos: Select at least 3 of the listed videos and films (e.g., Frank Luntz, George Lakoff, 12 Angry Men, Born Rich, Walmart: The High Cost of Low Prices). Provide brief summaries and then engage in critical analysis of specific portions of each chosen piece, emphasizing your interpretation over extensive summaries.

Self-Assessment: Write a reflection on your learning throughout the course, including your efforts, significant ideas, and memorable concepts. Avoid vague statements; instead, include specific examples and personal insights. Approach this introspective task flexibly, either at midterm and end, or as ongoing notes compiled into a short essay.

Paper For Above instruction

Critical reasoning within the context of philosophy involves analyzing arguments, identifying fallacies, evaluating moral dilemmas, and engaging with media critically. This portfolio project at Drexel University requires students to demonstrate these skills through various distinct content areas, including fallacy identification, moral analysis, op-ed critique, multimedia reflection, and personal self-assessment.

The first step involves scheduling a 30-minute meeting with the instructor, bringing drafts of two chosen content areas for feedback. This step emphasizes the importance of draft revision, peer review, and instructor guidance in developing critical reasoning skills. The fallacies section demands that students find actual examples of erroneous reasoning in texts or videos, or create dialogues exemplifying such fallacies, then identify and explain them critically. This exercise fosters an awareness of common reasoning errors and prepares students to avoid them in their own argumentation.

The Morals and Markets section challenges students to analyze concrete cases discussed by Sandel, encouraging thorough investigation into these dilemmas. The goal is to apply critical analysis by revealing how market and non-market values clash or align, supported by light research if necessary. This task develops an understanding of ethical principles in real-world economic contexts and hones the ability to weigh competing values and propose reasoned strategies for resolution.

The Op-Ed Analysis requires students to engage with contemporary media critically. Summarizing the author's argument charitably is essential to promote understanding, followed by a reasoned response—whether in agreement or disagreement—supported by logical reasoning. This activity enhances media literacy and argumentative skill, fostering careful reading and thoughtful critique of opinion pieces.

The Videos section concentrates on critical reflection on selected multimedia materials. By analyzing at least three of the provided films and videos, students are encouraged to interpret and critique communicative strategies, persuasive techniques, and underlying messages, honing their ability to interpret media critically and connect it to philosophical themes.

The Self-Assessment component invites students to introspectively reflect on their learning experiences. Rather than vague claims, students should offer concrete examples demonstrating growth in understanding critical reasoning, personal insights into the course material, and thoughts on future application of these skills. This reflection underscores the importance of metacognition and lifelong learning in philosophical inquiry.

References

• Walton, D. (2014). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
• Sandel, M. J. (2012). What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets. Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
• Frankl, V. E. (2006). Man's Search for Meaning. Beacon Press.
• Luntz, F. (2011). Frank Luntz on political speech [Video]. YouTube.
• Lakoff, G. (2010). Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. University of Chicago Press.
• The New York Times. (2022). Opinion: The ethics of market-driven society. NYTimes.com.
• Greenfield, R. (2014). The moral limits of markets: A review. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(1), 15-23.
• Greenwald, G. (2010). No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and Public Debate. Metropolitan Books.
• Klein, N. (2014). This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate. Simon & Schuster.
• George Lakoff. (2014). The Political Mind: Why You Can’t Understand 21st-Century Politics with an 18th-Century Brain. Viking.