Description
In Part II of the assignment (due Week 4), you will write a paper to synthesize your ideas.
Part II – Writing
Write at three to four (3-4) page paper in which you:
1. State your position on the topic you selected for Assignment 1.1.
2. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explain why you selected these specific reasons.
3. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.
4. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.
5. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.
6. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue has stayed the same.
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.
- Based on the guidelines in SWS, "A well-researched assignment has at least as many sources as pages." Since this assignment requires you to write at least 3-4 pages, you should include at least 3-4 references.
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.
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Part 2 - Outline
Are Social Networking Sites Good for Our Society?
Thesis statement: I understand proponents’ reasons for their position. However, my position is
that social media networking sites are not good for our society because they continue to destroy
the social fabric and the moral values with the rise of Internet and smartphone addiction, online
theft, cyberbullying, political radicalization, and false information. The essence of face-to-face
family and friendship time is becoming rare. These sites have replaced the traditional avenues,
which promote moral values, discipline, and the firm foundation of families.
I.
II.
Introduction
The first premise supporting my position
III.
The second premise supporting my position
IV.
The third premise supporting my position
V.
VI.
Biases
Conclusion
Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Part 2
By Name
Course
Professor
Date
1
Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Part 2
Are Social Networking Sites Good for Our Society?
The impact of social networking sites on our society is a debatable issue because there
are both negative and positive aspects. Therefore, the essence of an argument from either side
depends on how weighty it is in a particular context. Undeniably, as technology advancements
continue, communication gadgets such as smartphones, Ipads, and laptops are on high demand as
they also facilitate the growth of social media platforms such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter,
Pinterest, Snapchat, and Instagram. Consequently, users have formed connections beyond
geographical boundaries. They connect with unfamiliar people with similar interests even as they
communicate with their friends and families. Proponents argue that social networking sites are
good for our society because various connections enable developments and affirmative action.
Therefore, according to them, the rapid dis...