Please read all instructions before beginning the assignment so you do not miss any grading components. The completed tutorial should be posted no later than NOON on Sunday November 20th. Analytical Summaries - For this assignment, you will compose two short critical essays explaining and evaluating arguments by other authors. This assignment allows you to analyze an issue from a variety of perspectives and assess arguments for or against the issue. By focusing your attention on how the original authors use evidence and reasoning to construct and support their positions, you can recognize the value of critical thinking in public discourse. Select and read two articles from the chapter “Deciding to Accept an Argument: (Included at bottom of page). Compare the Evidence” in the textbook and write two separate analytical summaries. This assignment has two parts. Part 1—First Article-Write an analytical summary of the article focusing on the article’s main claims. Include the following: •Identify the three ways the author uses evidence to support assertions. •Identify the places where evidence is employed as well as how the author uses this evidence. For example, as the reason, the support for the reason, or as dependent on the issue/context. •Analyze how the author signals this usage through elements such as word choices, transitions, or logical connections. Part 2—Second Article-Write an analytical summary of the article focusing on the article’s main claims. Include the following: •Identify the author’s use of the three elements: experiment, correlation, and speculation to support assertions. •Analyze how the author signals the use of these elements through language. For example, word choices, transitions, or logical connections. Write a 4–5-page paper in Word format. Apply APA standards to citation of sources and complete references. An example of this is my textbook which you will need: In text citing is: ………and this is how it looks (Missimer, 2005). References
Missimer, C. (2005). Good arguments: An introduction to critical thinking, 4th ed. (C. Jones-
Owen, Ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
The following two articles show breathtaking advances in the ability to detect whether a person will suffer from a particular genetic disease. The first article contains references to all three types of evidence discussed in this chapter. Compare the language used to depict direct experimentation, after-the-fact evidence, and values questions. Article 1
by Jerry E. Bishop
Several years ago, Nancy Wexler’s mother died of Huntington’s disease, a hereditary and always-fatal affliction that strikes in midlife. Since then, Ms. Wexler, the 38-year-old president of the Hereditary Diseases Foundation in Santa Monica, Calif., has lived with the uncertainty of whether she, too, inherited the deadly gene. That uncertainty may soon be resolved. A few months ago, scientists announced they were on the verge of completing a new test to detect the gene for Huntington’s disease (formerly called Huntington’s chorea). But deciding whether to submit herself to the test is an anguishing choice for Ms. Wexler. “If I came out lucky, taking the test would be terrific, of course,” she says. “But if I came out unlucky, well …” Her dilemma is an extreme example of the kind thousands of Americans will face in the not-too-distant future as scientists learn how to pinpoint genes that cause or predispose a person to a future illness. The test to detect the Huntington’s disease gene should be ready within one to two years. Researchers already have detected some of the genes that can lead to premature heart attacks and, in the near future, hope to spot those that could predispose a person to breast or colon cancer. Eventually, scientists believe they will be able to detect genes leading to diabetes, depression, schizophrenia and the premature senility called Alzheimer’s disease. “Extraordinary...