+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com
  

Week 6 Discussion

DQ1 Rebuttals and Refutations

Required Resources

Read/review the following resources for this activity:

Textbook: Chapter 8

Lesson: Week 5, 6

Minimum of 1 new scholarly source

Apply the following writing resources to your posts:

Link (multimedia presentation): Citing References in Text (Links to an external site.)

Link (website): APA Citation and Writing (Links to an external site.)

Initial Post Instructions

Part 1: Research & Review

Review this week's lesson and reading. Find an academic source to back up your opposition's point of view. This is a new source, in addition to the source you located last week.

Part 2: Application

Anticipating readers' objections is one way to determine what other sections to include and support in your paper. Practice writing a counterargument that applies the Toulmin model. Incorporate one of the new sources you have gathered to present your opposition's point. Strive for at least 5 developed sentences. Cite your source in APA format.

Grounds / 1st Counterargument (your opposition's point)

Backing (establish credibility of the source)

Warrant (evidence)

Possible concession / conclusion

Answer the following prompts:

How were you able to remain objective while presenting the opponent's point of view?

What challenges did you face obtaining evidence to back up the assertion?

Which conciliatory approach did you apply and why?

How was it effective?

Follow-Up Post Instructions

Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Here, we have an opportunity to compare research notes with our fellow peers. As peers, reply to one another explaining whether or not your classmates are presenting the opposition objectively and provide potential refutations pointers. Give one another ideas or suggestions for points that may be left out or might need to be further developed.

DQ2 Deceptive Arguments

Required Resources

Read/review the following resources for this activity:

Textbook: Chapter 6

Lesson

Link (library article): Fear Advertisements: Influencing Consumers to Make Better Health Decisions (Links to an external site.)

Link (library article): Fear Appeals in Social Marketing: The Case of Anti-Speeding Video Advertisement "Mistakes" (Links to an external site.)

Apply the following writing resources to your posts:

Link (multimedia presentation): Citing References in Text (Links to an external site.)

Link (website): APA Citation and Writing (Links to an external site.)

Initial Post Instructions

Part 1: Research & Review

Review the two articles in Required Resources on the uses of logical fallacies and rhetorical appeals in the healthcare field.

The Krishen and Bui (2015) article discusses the active use of logical fallacies to manipulate obese consumers into making better health choices through two oppositional approaches: fear tactics and positive reinforcement.

The Giachino, Stupino, Peratulo, and Bertoldi (2017) article presents a study of fear tactics applied through social advertising, similar to the ads we discussed in our Week 3 discussion boards. Students were exposed to fear advertising in an attempt to reduce high speed driving.

Part 2: Application

Apply what you have learned about logical fallacies and rhetorical appeals to interpret and summarize the articles. Consider the following questions:

If the participants are aware of misleading manipulation techniques, are they immune to their effects?

What are the limitations of these types of fear inducing tactics?

How would you react if you were a subject in one of these studies?

What can we take away from these articles to apply in our own topics?

Where else have you seen these types of fear tactics applied (e.g., advertising, social media, word of mouth, etc.)? Are these other mediums effective? Why is that the case?

Cite your sources in APA format.

Follow-Up Post Instructions

Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Offer additional insight into your peers' responses by furthering the discussion. Did you notice any inconstancies in the persuasive methods applied that your peer might have missed? Did you notice any other specific logical fallacies in your peer's response? Have you ever fallen prey to the types of fear tactics commonly used in your classmate's topic? Provide an example if so. If not, how were you able to avoid susceptibility?