GCU COM362 Full Course Latest 2020 August

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 1 Reading Exercise

Topic 1 Reading Exercises from:

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

Chapter 1

INSTRUCTIONS

Identify the premises and conclusions in the following passages. Some premises do support the conclusion; others do not. Note that premises may support conclusions directly or indirectly and that even simple passages may contain more than one argument.

Example Problem

A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

—The Constitution of the United States, Amendment 2

Example Solution

Premise: A well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state.

Conclusion: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 2 Reading Exercise

Topic 2 Reading exercises from:

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

4.3 INSTRUCTIONS

Identify and explain the fallacies of relevance in the following passages:

PROBLEMS

1.If you can’t blame the English language and your own is unforgivingly precise, blame the microphone. That was the route Jacques Chirac took after his nuclear remark about a nuclear Iran. “Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that’s not very dangerous,” Mr. Chirac said with a shrug. The press was summoned back for a retake. “I should rather have paid attention to what I was saying and understood that perhaps I was on the record,” Mr. Chirac offered, as if the record rather than the remark were the issue.

—Stacy Schiff, “Slip Sliding Away,” The New York Times, 2 February 2007

2.Nietzsche was personally more philosophical than his philosophy. His talk about power, harshness, and superb immorality was the hobby of a harmless young scholar and constitutional invalid.

—George Santayana, Egotism in German Philosophy, 1915

3.Like an armed warrior, like a plumed knight, James G. Blaine marched down the halls of the American Congress and threw his shining lances full and fair against the brazen foreheads of every defamer of his country and maligner of its honor.

       For the Republican party to desert this gallant man now is worse than if an army should desert their general upon the field of battle.

—Robert G. Ingersoll, nominating speech at the

 

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 3 Reading Exercise

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

3.1 INSTRUCTIONS

Which of the various functions of language are exemplified by each of the following passages?

PROBLEMS

1.Check the box on line 6a unless your parent (or someone else) can claim you as a dependent on his or her tax return.

—U.S. Internal Revenue Service, “Instructions,” Form 1040, 2006

2.‘Twasbrillig, and the slithytoves

Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;

All mimsy were the borogoves,

And the momerathsoutgrabe.

—Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass, 1871

3.What traveler among the ruins of Carthage, of Palmyra, Persepolis, or Rome, has not been stimulated to reflections on the transiency of kingdoms and men, and to sadness at the thought of a vigorous and rich life now departed …?

—G. W. F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, 1823

4.Moving due south from the center of Detroit, the first foreign country one encounters is not Cuba, nor is it Honduras or Nicaragua or any other Latin American nation; it is Canada.

5.I was a child and she was a child,

In this kingdom by the sea,

But we loved with a love that was more than love—

I and my Annabel Lee—

—Edgar Allan Poe, “Annabel Lee,” 1849

 

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 4 Reading Exercise

Topic 4 Reading Exercises from:

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

5.3 INSTRUCTIONS

Identify the subject and predicate terms in, and name the form of, each of the following propositions:

PROBLEMS

1.Some historians are extremely gifted writers whose works read like first-rate novels.

2.No athletes who have ever accepted pay for participating in sports are amateurs.

3.No dogs that are without pedigrees are candidates for blue ribbons in official dog shows sponsored by the American Kennel Club.

4.All satellites that are currently in orbit less than ten thousand miles high are very delicate devices that cost many thousands of dollars to manufacture.

5.Some members of families that are rich and famous are not persons of either wealth or distinction.

6.Some paintings produced by artists who are universally recognized as masters are not works of genuine merit that either are or deserve to be preserved in museums and made available to the public.

7.All drivers of automobiles that are not safe are desperadoes who threaten the lives of their fellows.

8.Some politicians who could not be elected to the most minor positions are appointed officials in our government today.

9.Some drugs that are very effective when properly administered are not safe remedies that all medicine cabinets should contain.

10.No people who have not themselves done creative work in the arts are responsible critics on whose judgment we can rely.

 

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 5 Reading Exercise

Topic 5 Reading Exercises

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

EXERCISE A INSTRUCTIONS

State the converses of the following propositions, and indicate which of them are equivalent to the given propositions:

PROBLEMS

1.No people who are considerate of others are reckless drivers who pay no attention to traffic regulations.

2.All graduates of West Point are commissioned officers in the U.S. Army.

3.Some European cars are overpriced and underpowered automobiles.

4.No reptiles are warm-blooded animals.

5.Some professional wrestlers are elderly persons who are incapable of doing an honest day’s work.

EXERCISE B INSTRUCTIONS

State the obverses of the following propositions:

PROBLEMS

1.Some college athletes are professionals.

2.No organic compounds are metals.

3.Some clergy are not abstainers.

4.No geniuses are conformists.

5.All objects suitable for boat anchors are objects that weigh at least fifteen pounds.

 

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 6 Reading Exercise

Topic 6 Reading Exercises from:

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

6.1 INSTRUCTIONS

Rewrite each of the following syllogisms in standard form, and name its mood and figure. (Procedure: first, identify the conclusion; second, note its predicate term, which is the major term of the syllogism; third, identify the major premise, which is the premise containing the major term; fourth, verify that the other premise is the minor premise by checking to see that it contains the minor term, which is the subject term of the conclusion; fifth, rewrite the argument in standard form—major premise first, minor premise second, conclusion last; sixth, name the mood and figure of the syllogism.)

Example Problem

No nuclear-powered submarines are commercial vessels, so no warships are commercial vessels, because all nuclear-powered submarines are warships.

Example Solution

Step 1.  The conclusion is “No warships are commercial vessels.”

Step 2.  “Commercial vessels” is the predicate term of this conclusion and is therefore the major term of the syllogism.

Step 3.  The major premise, the premise that contains this term, is “No nuclear-powered submarines are commercial vessels.”

Step 4.  The remaining premise, “All nuclear-powered submarines are warships,” is indeed the minor premise, because it does contain the subject term of the conclusion, “warships.”

Step 5.  In standard form this syllogism is written thus:

                No nuclear-powered submarines are commercial vessels.

All nuclear-powered submarines are warships.

Therefore no warships are commercial vessels.

Step 6.  The three propositions in this syllogism are, in order, E, A, and E. The middle term, “nuclear-powered submarines,” is the subject term of both premises, so the syllogism is in the third figure. The mood and figure of the syllogism therefore are EAE-3.

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 7 Reading Exercise

Topic 7 Reading Exercises from:

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

7.2 INSTRUCTIONS

Translate the following syllogistic arguments into standard form, and test their validity by using the syllogistic rules set forth in Chapter 6.

Example Problem

Some preachers are persons of unfailing vigor. No preachers are nonintellectuals. Therefore some intellectuals are persons of unfailing vigor.

Example Solution

This argument may be translated into: Some preachers are persons of unfailing vigor. (Some P is V.) All preachers are intellectuals. (By obversion: All P is I.) Therefore some intellectuals are persons of unfailing vigor. (Some I is V.) Explain whether the syllogism is valid using the 6 rules (6.4) and mood (6.5).

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 8 Reading Exercise

Topic 8 Reading Exercises from:

Copi, Irving M. Introduction to Logic, 14th Edition. Routledge.

7.5 INSTRUCTIONS

For each of the following enthymematic arguments:

a. Formulate the plausible premise or conclusion, if any, that is missing but understood.

b. Write the argument in standard form, including the missing premise or conclusion needed to make the completed argument valid—if possible—using parameters if necessary.

c. Name the order of the enthymeme.

d. If the argument is not valid even with the understood premise included, name the fallacy that it commits.

Example Problem

Transgenic animals are manmade and as such are patentable.

—Alan E. Smith, cited in Genetic Engineering

(San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 1990)

Example Solution

a. The premise understood but not stated here is that whatever is manmade is patentable.

b. Standard-form translation:

All manmade things are patentable things.

All transgenic animals are manmade things.

Therefore, all transgenic animals are patentable things.

c. The enthymeme is first-order, because the premise taken as understood is the major premise of the completed argument.

d. This is a valid syllogism of the form AAA–1, Barbara.

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 2 Assignment

Social Fallacies

Specialists in communication are often hired to clean up problems created by unthoughtful messaging. While advocates dedicate significant amounts of time and energy promoting causes, they often struggle to clearly identify their logical positions. To further the problem, in light of clear arguments advocates commonly utilize informal fallacies to persuade their target audiences. These weaknesses tend to create easily avoidable communications crises. The first step is to identify the communicative problems.

For this assignment, identify a social issue you are personally interested in learning more about, advocating for the cause, or are against it, and identify fallacious reasoning.

In 750-1,000 words:

Research an advocate (individual or organization) that promotes a relevant social issue. Identify the organization and explain the relevancy of the social issue. 

Show the steps you took to translate the position/argument you researched into a clear logical form by writing out the logical premises and conclusions from the material presented by the advocate.

Identify a minimum of five informal fallacies that are made by the advocate. Explain the fallacies themselves and how each functions.

At least two academic peer-reviewed sources are required for this paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

All B.A. in Communication majors should save the final version of this assignment with edits that incorporate faculty feedback after grading. Students should also save the assignment directions. COM-490: Communication Capstone will require students to prepare a portfolio that showcases their work in the program. Please save this assignment in multiple locations. See the “Communication Professional Portfolio Guide” under course materials for further instructions.

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 8 Assignment

Social Issue Analysis and Response

The skills you have been practicing throughout the course will be assessed in this paper and conclude with you constructing your own argument on a position. Your argument can be a contradiction, a support, or an alteration of the argument you’ve research. Whichever you choose should be sufficiently supported with materials covered throughout the course and your own outside research.

This assignment should continue with the social issue research conducted in Topic 2

In 1,000-1,500 words

Summarize the position/argument researched and assess it for validity. This positions/argument should be presented in a clear logical form. This includes translating their rhetoric into: premises and a conclusion, identifying the category of propositions, and the quality and the quantity of the parts.

Identify the assumptions of the position by drawing inferences from its communicated proposition to its position regarding human dignity.

Construct a valid and sound argument that contradicts, challenges, or improves the position of the organization.

At least three academic peer-reviewed sources are required for this paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

All B.A. in Communication majors should save the final version of this assignment with edits that incorporate faculty feedback after grading. Students should also save the assignment directions. COM-490: Communication Capstone will require students to prepare a portfolio that showcases their work in the program. Please save this assignment in multiple locations. See the “Communication Professional Portfolio Guide” under course materials for further instructions.

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 1 Discussion

DQ1 Aristotle described argumentation as the following: “For to a certain extent all men attempt to discuss statements and to maintain them, to defend themselves, and to attack others.” Aristotle’s description of argumentation represents his view of how argumentation is a part of who we are as human beings. Do you agree or disagree with Aristotle’s viewpoint? Explain why. How has his viewpoint played a significant role in the historical development of argumentation?

DQ2 Find a blog that presents and defends an argument within one of its posts. Write a paragraph evaluating the arguments as either inductive or deductive. Provide the blog link in your paragraph response. Why do you think identifying these different elements in an argument is important?

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 2 Discussion

DQ1 When watching or reading the news, what fallacies do you see people make most often in their arguments?

DQ2 Identify a fallacy you used in a recent discussion with another person. Why did you use that fallacy and how can you address the concern without the use of the fallacy?

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 3 Discussion

DQ1 Find an example in society of a dispute that is (1) based on the ambiguity of language and (2) is not a genuine dispute. Point out the differences and propose how to resolve the dispute.

DQ2 Take a term that is related to a social issue you are personally interested in and clearly define it. For example, defining a right vs a privilege in the debates on health care. Comment on another student’s post by seeing if you can find an exception that is excluded from the definition given.

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 4 Discussion

DQ1 Examine an argument made in public and translate its conclusion to show one of the four standard-form categorical propositions (A, E, I, or O). Does the conclusion follow from the premises? Why or why not? Second, if its premises are true, what else can you infer about the conclusion? Analyze.

[Note: Remember that standard-form categorical propositions use affirmative or negative “to be” verbs (e.g., is, are, am, was, were, be, been, being) in its copula to set up a connection between two classes — the subject (S) and the predicate (P).]

DQ2 As you are learning about propositions and contradictions, write out a view that you hold on a social issue in propositional form (A, E, I, or O). What is the logical contradiction to your view? Identify a specific group that advocates the contradiction of your viewpoint.

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 5 Discussion

DQ1 Using an argument from an organization you found, create the logical contradiction for the organization’s position. Be sure to properly label the quality and quantity of the propositions.

DQ2 How would you communicate with someone who holds a different view than yourself in a way that is logically sound but does not deny the human dignity of the other person?

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 6 Discussion

DQ1 Why is it important to understand how a syllogism functions when it comes to doing advocacy work?

DQ2 Provide an argument in affirmation of the topic: It is better to protect privacy over security. Your response should be at least 250 words long and include at least one source found using resources available from the school’s library or online.

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 7 Discussion

DQ1 Research an argument in the realm of apologetics and evaluate the syllogism given (e.g., the transcended argument for the existence of God). Translate the argument into a standard-form categorical syllogism with a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion that contains a major term (predicate) and a minor term (subject). Make certain the major term, minor term, and middle term are connected by an affirmative or negative copula that uses “to be” verbs (e.g., is, are, am, was, were, be, been, being) in both premises and the conclusion.

DQ2 Find an argument against a position you hold. This can be in the realm of politics, religion, art, etc. Identify the form of the argument and state whether it is valid or invalid. Then, provide a response.

 

 

 

 

 

COM362 Argumentation and Advocacy

Week 8 Discussion

DQ1 When you are asked to construct an ethical argument, what do you consider that to mean? Explain and discuss with other whether there are objective or subjective standards for ethical arguments.

DQ2 Find an outside source that argues for some specific ethical standards in its argumentation. Translate it into a syllogism and evaluate its position. Comment on another student’s post.