PHL111 Discussions

.docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

111

Subject

Anthropology

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by AdmiralCaterpillarMaster1078 on coursehero.com

DISCUSSION TWO  Post the link to the article that you selected.  Identify and list at least two premises and a conclusion of the argument.  Determine if the premises are reliable. (Use CRAAP test, Boss, pp. 116–117).  Decide if the argument is deductive or inductive. Explain. https://www.npr.org/2024/02/10/1230446226/opinion-this-valentines-day-im-giving- the-gift-of-hearing The premises of this opinion piece are hearing aids are embarrassing for others to notice and that hearing loss affects a large portion of the population. The article concludes that being able to hear your family is worth the hearing aid journey. Also, hearing aid technology has become much more unnoticeable. The premises are reliable according to the CRAAP test. The article was posted in the last month and was posted by someone experiencing hearing loss personally. The accuracy of the information can be double checked thru many outside sources (i.e. Mayo Clinic). The argument presented is inductive because there is no guarantee that the user will like the hearing aids. Of course, it’s probable that the person will appreciate being able to hear more clearly. However, it doesn’t mean that they won’t be embarrassed by having to speak about them or wear them. Therefore, I must use inductive reasoning to reach the conclusion. DISCUSSION THREE For your initial post , you will discuss the concept of credibility in your own words as learned in this course. Then, you will choose one piece of media from any source and assess its main argument.  Cite the source of the media piece in APA style.  Identify at least two premises and a conclusion.  Assess the strength of the inductive argument.  Assess the credibility of the source, using the CRAAP test. Credibility is defined as the credentials with which one has acquired in a field as well as their possible conflicts of interest on the topic. To determine if someone is credible, we must review their experience, education, reputation, and accomplishments. Along with the previously discussed requirements, we must also determine if the person has any conflicts of interest at play (i.e. getting paid from interested parties). I chose an excerpt from the Anthropology textbook I’m using for a different class. This piece discusses the benefits of upright movement. The first premise of the section is that modern humans shifted to upright movement with less ability to use all four limbs for movement. This modern shift is attributed to several aspects of human life. The second premise is that the following items contributed to the development of bipedalism directly; carrying objects, hunting benefits, upright reaching, walking/running, vigilance/visual surveillance, and heat regulation. The conclusion of the argument is that humans have become adapted on walking on two legs, but no single reason can be concluded. This reasoning is inductive because several observations lead to a general conclusion. C—Currency (published 2019)

R—Relevance – Relevant and current to the information needed. A—Authority – Published by a studied anthropologist and trusted academic publisher. A—Accuracy – No spelling/grammatical errors; and accurate information cross referenced with sources throughout the textbook. P—Purpose – The purpose is to educate about evolutionary processes related to human development and anthropological views on the topic. Welsch, R. (2019). Anthropology (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press Academic US. https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/books/9780190057381 DISCUSSION FOUR A) Using the material you provided in Milestone One, briefly present the article's argument and your assessment. 1. Identify at least two premises and a conclusion of the argument. 2. Assess the argument for its strength (if inductive) or validity (if deductive). B) Explain whether the argument contains or avoids bias, including specific examples. For example, what assumptions does the argument make? Are they warranted or unwarranted? C) Assess the credibility of the overall argument, using the CRAAP test. https://www.helpguide.org/articles/mental-health/social-media-and-mental-health.htm The first premise of the argument in this article is that social media can deteriorate our mental health with lack of balance. Second, it’s important to learn to regulate our feelings without using social media as a distraction. There are several other premises in this article about how social media affects humans. The conclusion is that social media can be beneficial with moderated use. However, if balance is not achieved, social media can cause anxiety, depression, and many other negative effects. The argument avoids bias because the article gives both up and downsides of social media use. The argument is well informed with several references that corroborate it. Below is the CRAAP test.  C—Currency – reviewed Feb 2024  R—Relevance – The article gives relevant and current information regarding social media use.  A—Authority - published by Managing Editor (Lawrence Robinson) and Editor in Chief (Melissa Smith) of Helpguide.org. Both have extensive experience in writing. Melissa has experience with health writing and an MS in psychology.  A—Accuracy – There are no grammatical errors and there is accurate information based on my own experience with social media. I’ve also searched for other articles and the two below agree with the conclusions. The statistics are reliable in this article.  P—Purpose – The purpose is to educate the public about the dangers of excessive social media use and strategies to find balance in life.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version