PHI103 WEEK 4 Assignment FOR SUZIKANE08 ONLY!!!!!

Week 4 – Assignment

Evaluate an ArgumentPlease read the instructions below for information on how to complete this assignment. 

For a list of resources that are specific to this assignment, please utilize the “Resources Tab” located below.

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now

If you feel that you need help with any of the main topics for this week, please revisit the Practice Activities located in the Weekly Overview.AssignmentResourcesChoose an argument that you found online (you may utilize an argument from a video posted online, a blog, a news source, a political website, or any other resource that will allow you to satisfactorily meet the requirements of the assignment). You may also select from this week’s relevant recommended resources.

Once you have selected your source, you will then evaluate the argument being presented in the source in an essay of 400 words. In your evaluation:
Identify the issue, the premises, and conclusions of the argument.Determine whether the argument is sound or unsound (deductive), valid or invalid (deductive), or strong or weak (inductive).Explain why you have chosen to label it as sound or unsound, valid or invalid, and/or strong or weak.
Use the “Steps for evaluating an argument ” template for assistance with structuring your evaluation; however, you should construct and submit your evaluation in an essay format. Do not merely turn in a bulleted outline. 

The essay must be 400 words in length, excluding title and reference pages, and formatted according to APA style. For information regarding APA formatting, including samples and tutorials, visit the Ashford Writing Center, located within the Learning Resources tab on the left navigation toolbar in your online course. The only required resource for this assignment is the media object or written work you analyze. This should be the piece that you primarily use to complete this assignment. Secondary sources are welcome but not necessary, and they should not be used in place of the argument piece you analyze.

The Ashford Writing Center (AWC)  has two kinds of tutoring available to you.
Live Chat – If you have writing-related questions about a topic before you draft a discussion post or submit a written assignment, you will now be able to chat live with a tutor for a short (up to 20 minute) conversation. Live Chat will be available Monday through Friday from 10:00-11:00 am and 4:00-5:00 pm (PST). AWC Live Chat Email Paper Review – If you have a draft, partial draft, or even if you’re having trouble getting started, you can complete a submission form and email your paper to the AWC for review.Writing Tutors will do their best to return your paper with their comments within 48 hours, not including Saturdays and Sundays. Please plan accordingly if you would like to receive feedback before an assignment due date. AWC Email Paper Review Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.

Late Policy: Written assignments (essays, journals, presentations) are due on the specified days in the course. Written assignments will be subject to a late penalty of up to 10% per day up to three days late. If written assignments are submitted after 72 hours past the due date, instructors can give a penalty up to and including a grade of 0 for the assignment.     PHI103.W4A1.10.2013Description:

Total Possible Score: 3.00 Identifies the Issue, Premises, and Conclusion of the ArgumentTotal: 0.70

Distinguished – Accurately and clearly identifies the issue, premises, and conclusion of the argument. The identification is clear and concise.

Proficient – Accurately identifies the issue, premises, and conclusion of the argument. The identification is slightly unclear or imprecise.

Basic – Accurately identifies at least two of the three components of the argument. The identification of the issue, premises, or conclusion is unclear, imprecise, or inaccurate.

Below Expectations – Accurately identifies at least one component of the argument. The identification of the issue, premises, and/or conclusion is significantly unclear, imprecise, and/or inaccurate.

Non-Performance – The identification of the issue, premises, and conclusion of the argument is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions. 
Determines Whether the Argument Is Valid/Invalid, Sound/Unsound, and/or Strong/WeakTotal: 1.40

Distinguished – Clearly determines whether the argument is valid/invalid, sound/unsound, and/or strong/weak in accordance with the properties of deductive and inductive arguments, and fully explains reasoning.

Proficient – Somewhat clearly determines whether the argument is valid/invalid, sound/unsound, and/or strong/weak, and adequately explains reasoning. The explanation omits minor details related to the properties of inductive and deductive arguments.

Basic – Determines whether the argument is valid/invalid, sound/unsound, and/or strong/weak, and partially explains reasoning. The explanation omits relevant details that are necessary to fully explain the properties of inductive and deductive arguments.

Below Expectations – Attempts to determine whether the argument is valid/invalid, sound/unsound, and/or strong/weak and explain reasoning; however, the explanation omits or inaccurately represents significant details that are necessary to explain the properties of inductive and deductive arguments.

Non-Performance – The determination of whether the argument is valid/invalid, sound/unsound, and/or strong/weak is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions. 
Written Communication: Control of Syntax and MechanicsTotal: 0.30

Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors, and is very easy to understand.

Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors, and is mostly easy to understand.

Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors, which may slightly distract the reader.

Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors, which distract the reader.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. 
Word RequirementTotal: 0.30

Distinguished – The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of words.

Proficient – The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of words.

Basic – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of words.

Below Expectations – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of words.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. 
APA FormattingTotal: 0.15

Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.

Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.

Basic – Exhibits basic knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.

Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. 
Resource RequirementTotal: 0.15

Distinguished – Uses more than one scholarly source, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Proficient – Uses one scholarly source to support ideas. The source is used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment and on the reference page.

Basic – Uses one scholarly source to somewhat support ideas. Citations may not be formatted correctly within the body of the assignment and/or on the reference page.

Below Expectations – Uses one source that provides little or no support for ideas. The source may not be scholarly, and citations are not formatted correctly within the body of the assignment and/or on the reference page.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Powered by ResourcesRequired Resources

Template
Johnson, P. (2013). Steps for evaluating an argument [Template]. Office of Assessment Strategies & Instructional Systems, Ashford University, Clinton, IA.
This template will assist with the process of evaluating an argument.

Recommended Resources

Examples of Arguments in Media

You may use these examples in your essay or find your own arguments to evaluate.  It is not necessary to view all examples, but it is encouraged that you view as many as necessary to find an argument you would like to evaluate.
Adobe. (2012, Oct. 24). The Slap [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFvpzK8_PDEThis commercial presents students with a specific logical fallacy example.Transcript.Dunning, B. (2013). Logical Fallacies 2 [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z71w-rHkeSk&feature=episodic&NR=1This video demonstrates multiple informal logical fallacies that the students will examine during this week. Transcript.TheHtownusa. (2011, March 31). The fallacy project: Examples of fallacies from advertising, politics, and popular culture [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXLTQi7vVsITranscript.UnlimitedProductions. (2006, Oct. 30). Monty Python – The Annoying Peasant [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAaWvVFERVAMonty Python and the holy grail: Peasant scene. (2009). In MontyPython.net[Transcript]. Retrieved from http://www.montypython.net/scripts/HG-peascene.php