EXERCISES, QUESTIONS, AND ACTIVITIES My Answers

Transcription

1 EXERCISES, QUESTIONS, AND ACTIVITIES My Answers Exercises Drinking Age ) Although some laws appear unmotivated, many laws have obvious justifications. For instance, driving while under the influence is against the law, right? The reason it s against the law is that it endangers the lives of others. This passage contains an explanation of why because it s assuming that we already know that driving while under the influence is against the law and attempting to account for why it s against the law. ) Are you going to the polls this week? Don t vote for lowering the drinking age. The reason is that it will increase fatalities in alcohol-related automobile accidents. This passage is an argument attempting to persuade us that the drinking age should be lowered. The first sentence in this passage should be ignored because it s a normal question. The second sentence, however, is a statement command conveying the ultimate conclusion that we shouldn t vote for lowering the drinking age. The argument is diagrammed below:. We shouldn t vote for lowering the drinking age.. Lowering the drinking age will increase fatalities in alcohol-related automobile accidents. A ) Are you going to the polls this week? Don t vote for lowering the drinking age. The reason is that it will increase fatalities in alcohol-related automobile accidents, since more young people will be drinking and driving.. We shouldn t vote for lowering the drinking age.. Lowering the drinking age will increase fatalities in alcohol-related automobile accidents. 3. More young people will be drinking and driving. 3 A B

2 Argument strikes me as mediocre. Premise 3 seems true and acceptable to most people; certainly there are some young people who don t drink and drive now, but who would drink and drive if they could drink legally. Inference A is pretty good because if Bob believed that lowering the drinking age would lead more young people to drive while intoxicated, it s a fair bet that he d believe lowering the drinking age would increase fatal car accidents. But inference B is only so-so. If Bob believed that lowering the drinking age would increase the number of fatal car accidents, he could still wonder if that is sufficient reason to oppose lowering the drinking age. Are we required to do whatever it takes to make the world as safe as possible for everyone? Mightn t there be competing values to consider? 3) Intoxication is the result of elevated blood alcohol levels consequent upon alcohol consumption. The effects of alcohol intoxication include loss of coordination and slower reaction time. This is neither an explanation of why nor an argument. It simply tells us what intoxication is. 4) Just think about it for a minute. Does anyone really think that 6 year olds can t get alcohol if they really want it? Consequently, the drinking age might as well be lowered to 6. This passage contains an argument for the conclusion that the drinking age should not be lowered. The first sentence in this passage is a normal command and should be ignored, but the second sentence is a statement question conveying the idea that 6 year olds can get alcohol if they want it. The argument is diagrammed as follows:. The drinking age might as well be lowered to year olds can get alcohol if they want it. A 4 ) Just think about it for a minute. Does anyone think that 6 year olds can t get alcohol if they want it? Consequently, the drinking age might as well be lowered to 6. And given that, we should be allowed to have a cash bar at the junior prom.. We should be allowed to have a cash bar at the junior prom.. 6 year olds can get alcohol if they want it. 3. The drinking age might as well be lowered to 6. A 3 B

3 3 If I were to evaluate argument 4, I would criticize both of the inferences. Bob could believe that 6 year olds can obtain alcohol without believing that the drinking age might as well be lowered to 6. The fact that people can do something, he could think doesn t mean that it should be legal. People can break into houses if they really want to, but this doesn t imply that the laws against breaking-and-entering should be weakened or repealed. The fact that Bob could make this point means that inference A is weak. Similarly, inference B is weak because Bob could believe that the drinking age should be lowered to 6 without believing that the students should be allowed to have a bar at the prom. We legalize things that we re willing to tolerate but don t necessarily want to encourage, like smoking, so Bob could think that while 6 year olds should be permitted to drink, we shouldn t go out of our way to help them do it. Since inferences A and B don t look very good to me, I d say that argument as a whole is bad. 5) Have you wondered why Congressman Harkin, a conservative on many social issues, says that she wants the drinking age lowered? Think about it. She s courting the youth vote. Consequently, she claims to be in favor of lowering the drinking age. This passage is an explanation of why because it s assuming we already know that Congressman Harkin claims to be in favor of lowering the drinking age. It attempts to account for why this is the case. 6) The Anti-Saloon League was formed in Oberlin, Ohio in 893. Within two years, it had achieved national influence and, along with the Women s Christian Temperance Union, was instrumental in passing the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which instituted prohibition. This is neither an explanation of why nor an argument. It simply tells us what the Anti- Saloon League was. 7) I think that lowering the drinking age is wrong because I m a tee-totaler. This passage is an explanation of why because it accounts for why the author disapproves of lowering the drinking age without attempting to convince us that we should disapprove of it, too. 8) There are a lot of issues about which I suspend judgment. Nevertheless, I think that lowering the drinking age is wrong. I think this because someone would have to be crazy to think that people under are mature enough to handle the responsibilities that go along with drinking. This passage contains an argument. There are a lot of issues about which I suspend judgment, is an unimportant statement that we ll leave off our list. Both I think that lowering the drinking age is wrong, and Someone would have to be crazy to think that people under are mature enough to handle the responsibilities that go along with

4 4 drinking, are masking statements. The first sentence masks the idea that lowering the drinking age is, in fact, wrong and the second sentence masks the idea that people under aren t mature enough to handle the responsibilities that go along with drinking. The diagram for this argument is:. Lowering the drinking age is wrong.. People under aren t mature enough to handle the responsibilities that go along with drinking. A 8 ) There are a lot of issues about which I suspend judgment. Nevertheless, I think that lowering the drinking age is wrong. I think this because since today s youth enjoy a prolonged adolescence, someone would have to be crazy to think that people under are mature enough to handle the responsibilities that go along with drinking. This passage contains an argument. Here s how I d diagram it.. Lowering the drinking age is wrong.. Today s youth enjoy a prolonged adolescence 3. People under aren t mature enough to handle the responsibilities that go alone with drinking. A 3 B Looking over argument 8, I d have to say that premise seems pretty bad because it doesn t strike me as true and acceptable to people who aren t already opposed to lowering the drinking age. What evidence do we have to indicate that young people today take longer to grow up? Mightn t someone argue that young people today actually mature faster, since they re exposed to a wider variety of experiences than young people were 50 years ago? Since premise is bad, and since one bad premise ruins a premise / subconclusion / ultimate conclusion argument, argument 8 fails. Gargoyles ) Gargoyles are customarily grotesque figures which adorn waterspouts and the parapets of buildings. They are often carved from stone. The gargoyles of Notre Dame are particularly famous, and were featured in the Disney film The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

5 5 This passage contains neither an argument nor an explanation of why. ) Gargoyles were carved on the rain spouts of Medieval churches because people wanted to protect these buildings from the influence of evil spirits and because they believed that the gargoyles would frighten these spirits away. This passage contains an explanation of why. 3) I d bet a million dollars that people who lived in the Middle Ages were very superstitious. After all, they put gargoyles on churches to keep evil spirits away, which means that they believed in spirits. This passage contains an argument, which I d diagram and evaluate as follows.. People who lived in the Middle Ages were very superstitious.. People who lived in the Middle Ages put gargoyles on churches to keep evil spirits away. 3. People who lived in the Middle Ages believed in spirits. A B Because I think that supersition involves the grounds for ones beliefs rather than the content of ones beliefs, and because I m willing to accept that people could have good grounds for believing in spirits, I don t think that inference B is very strong. Athletic Scholarships. Give me an S! Give me a C! Give me a H, double- O L! What does it spell? School! That s right! School. In case you ve forgotten, school is a place where people go to learn academic subjects like mathematics and languages. This means that while sports may be a nice addition to the college experience, they aren t part of the central mission of higher-education. Clearly, then, we shouldn t raise extra alumni-money for athletic scholarships, since there shouldn t be athletic scholarships at all in view of the fact that sports aren t part of a college s central mission.. We shouldn t raise extra alumni-money for athletic scholarships.. School is a place where people go to learn academic subjects like mathematics and languages. 3. Sports aren t part of the central mission of higher-education. 4. There shouldn t be athletic scholarships at all.

6 6 A 3 B 4 C I d say that this argument is bad because inference B breaks down. Bob could believe that sports aren t part of higher-education s central mission while still thinking that athletic scholarships are a good idea. He could be in favor of all types of scholarships because he could think that students should get every kind of financial assistance possible. Since Bob could believe 3 without believing 4, inference B is weak. And since one bad inference is all you need to ruin a premise / subconclusion / ultimate conclusion argument, the argument is bad as well. Graduation Requirements ) Most colleges and universities have some general requirements for graduation. Usually students have to take some English, some mathematics, some science and some humanities. Philosophy often satisfies a humanities requirement, although this requirement usually can be fulfilled in other ways, perhaps by taking a course in art or music appreciation. This passage contains neither an argument nor an explanation of why. ) Lots of people take philosophy because they enjoy it. Some people take philosophy because they believe it will make them wiser human beings. There are a lot of reasons to take philosophy, but do you think that philosophy classes should be required for graduation? If not, consider this for a moment. Who among us is naive enough to believe that all of the important questions can be answered by science alone? This goes to show that many important questions can be answered only by philosophy. Thus, philosophy should be required for graduation.. Philosophy should be required for graduation.. Not all important questions can be answered by science alone. 3. Many important questions can be answered only by philosophy. A 3) Have you heard the news? Some people actually want to increase number of classes required for graduation. What a bunch of morons! If that s a good idea, I ll stick my finger in an electrical socket! I mean, just think about it for a minute. Won t

7 7 increasing the graduation requirements make it take longer to graduate? It doesn t take a genius to figure that out! And this just means that increasing the graduation requirements will force students to pay more tuition. Thus, increasing the graduation requirements will result in more people dropping out of school. Good plan!. We shouldn t increase the number of credits required for graduation.. Increasing the graduation requirements will make it take longer to graduate. 3. Increasing the graduation requirements will force students to pay more tuition. 4. Increasing the graduation requirements will result in more people dropping out of school. 3 B 4 C Philosophy ) Philosophy is the process of examining of questions that can t be addressed through empirical, or scientific means. It has three main branches: metaphysics, which studies the ultimate nature of reality; epistemology, which studies knowledge and belief; and value theory, which examines the nature of good and bad. This passage contains neither an argument nor an explanation of why. ) What s your opinion of philosophy? Since God, if he exists, would probably prefer thoughtful doubt to thoughtless faith, philosophy is an important discipline.. Philosophy is an important discipline.. God, if he exists, would probably prefer thoughtful doubt to thoughtless faith. A 3) Have you heard the latest? Since it encourages people to think critically about the existence of God, some people want to discourage entering freshmen from taking philosophy. This passage contains an explanation of why. 4) I ve never really thought much about philosophy. I guess I believe that philosophy is

8 8 important mostly because both of my parents taught it. This passage contains an explanation of why. 5) I m sure I don t have any right to tell people what s important and what s not. I guess I believe that philosophy is important mostly because it helps people to think for themselves.. Philosophy is important.. Philosophy helps people to think for themselves. 6) Certain individuals are threatened by philosophy. This is probably because philosophy asks the big questions, like Is there a God? and subjects them to rational examination. However squeamish some people might be about philosophy, though, it s clear that philosophy courses should be required of all entering freshmen since only philosophy courses really teach critical thinking skills.. Philosophy courses should be required of all entering freshmen.. Only philosophy courses really teach critical thinking skills. A Faith ) Lots of people think that it s ethically permissible to believe things on the basis of faith alone. What do you think? Do you think that it s fine to believe things on faith, without reason to back it up? Seems like a plausible position to take, doesn t it? But if you really think about it, I m sure you ll change your mind. Beliefs based on faith alone can lead you hurt people, because inasmuch as beliefs that aren t supported by evidence stand a good chance of being false, beliefs based on faith alone stand a good chance of leading you to make bad decisions. So now what do you think about believing things on the basis of faith alone?. It isn t fine to believe things on faith alone.. Beliefs based on faith alone can lead you to hurt people. 3. Beliefs that aren t supported by evidence stand a good chance of being false. 4. Beliefs based on faith alone stand a good chance of leading you to make bad decisions. 3

9 9 4 C ) Of course it s okay to believe things based on faith! How could anyone possibly think otherwise?! William James has argued for the defensibility of faith pretty convincingly. The basic idea is that there are some issues that we just can t decide rationally. As a result we can t avoid believing things on the basis of faith sometimes, and so it can t be ethically wrong.. It s okay to believe things based on faith.. There are some issues that we just can t decide rationally. 3. We can t avoid believing things on the basis of faith sometimes. B 3) I suppose it s to be expected that in this secular day-and-age people would be dismissing the importance of a faith life. Satan truly has his hand on the heart of America today. Thankfully, all God-fearing men and women know that people who base their beliefs on reason alone will go to Hell. The reason is that we ll get to Heaven only if we believe some things on faith and so faith is essential to the fate of our eternal souls.. People who base their beliefs on reason alone will go to Hell.. We ll get to Heaven only if we believe some things on faith. 3. Faith is essential to the fate of our eternal souls. B The Meaning of Life ) Human beings have probably been wondering about the meaning of life ever since they had enough food to eat and a nice warm cave to stay in. I ll bet that you ve wondered about the meaning of life, yourself. It simply can t be denied: human beings

10 0 are meaning-seeking animals. This goes to show that religion is essential to our mental health which in turn means that churches should be funded by insurance companies.. Churches should be funded by insurance companies.. Human beings are meaning-seeking animals. 3. Religion is essential to our mental health. A ) Many people believe that life has a meaning because the alternative would render their existence intolerable. Unless they believed that life has a meaning, they d find it hard to get out of bed each morning. Without faith in some transcendent purpose, their jobs would seem absurd, their relationships empty, and every aspect of their lives chaotic and profoundly futile. This passage contains an explanation of why. 3) Since the beginning of recorded history, people have wondered about the meaning of life. Have you, yourself, ever wondered whether or not life has a meaning? If so, then consider this. Many people from many different cultures have reported experiencing God. This goes to show that God really exists. But since God exists, there must be a meaning to life.. There must be a meaning to life.. Many people from many different cultures have reported experiencing God. 3. God really exists. A 4) Convinced by the preceding argument, were you? Many people have been. Take a moment, however, to consider the following. Consciousness is the product of a physical system, specifically the brain. But in view of the fact that consciousness is the product of a physical system, it can t survive the death of the physical body. Therefore, there is no life after death and this goes to show that there is no ultimate meaning to life.. There is no ultimate meaning to life.. Consciousness is the product of a physical system, specifically the brain. 3. Consciousness can t survive the death of the physical body.

11 4. There is no life after death. 3 4 C 5) Some people think that a finite life can t have meaning. But if a finite life can t have meaning then I m a monkey s uncle! After all, can t a novel have meaning even though it eventually ends?. A finite life can have meaning.. A novel can have meaning even though it eventually ends. 6) Can anyone be so unimaginative as to really believe that if God doesn t exist then life has no meaning? After all, it s clear that human beings can give things meaning. This is proven by the fact that we ve given stars meaning by clumping them together into constellations.. Life can have meaning if God doesn t exist.. Human beings can give things meaning. 3. We ve given stars meaning by clumping them together into constellations. 3 A B 7) Some people give their lives meaning by devoting themselves to a cause. Some people give their lives meaning by believing in God. Yet other people give their lives meaning by forming mutually fulfilling relationships with other people. This passage contains neither an argument nor an explanation of why. 8) How can anyone believe that life doesn t have a meaning? Obviously it does! Think about it this way. The purpose of your existence is to know God and go to Heaven, which means that the purpose of life in general, for everybody, is to know God and go to Heaven. Therefore, life has a meaning after all.

12 . Life has a meaning.. The purpose of your existence is to know God and go to Heaven. 3. The purpose of life in general, for everybody, is to know God and go to Heaven. A Free Will and Morality ) The notion of free will is an important and vexed one within philosophy. At its most basic, free will is the ability to do what one wants to do, without being compelled to behave that way. This passage contains neither an argument nor an explanation of why. ) Most people believe in free will. You probably believe in it yourself because it probably seems as though you often have the ability to act on your own desires, free from external constraint. This passage contains an explanation of why. 3) Since all of our thoughts and actions stem from physical processes in our brains, we don t have free will.. We don t have free will.. All of our thoughts and actions stem from physical processes in our brains. 4) Since all of our thoughts and actions stem from physical processes in our brains, we don t have free-will. And this goes to show that we can t be held morally responsible for anything we do.. We can t be held morally responsible for anything we do.. We don t have free will. 3. All of our thoughts and actions stem from physical processes in our brains.

13 3 5) Susan is culpable for offending Dan with the racist joke because she told the joke of her own free will.. Susan is culpable for offending Dan with the racist joke.. Susan told the joke of her own free will. A 6) Susan is culpable for offending Dan with the racist joke because she told the joke of her own free will. After all, couldn t she have told another joke, or refrained from telling any joke at all?. Susan is culpable for offending Dan with the racist joke.. Susan told the joke of her own free will. 3. Susan could have told another joke or refrained from telling any joke at all. 3 B Ethics and Offense ) I ll bet you re wondering why Dan stormed away from the party. Someone told an offcolor joke that offended him. Consequently, he grabbed his coat and left. This passage contains an explanation of why. ) Different things offend different people and some things are offensive in some cultures but not offensive in others. Nonetheless, we should all do our best to avoid offending others unnecessarily. This passage contains neither an argument nor an explanation of why. 3) It s ethically wrong to offend people. Consequently, who can deny that there should be a law against it?. There should be a law against offending people.. It s ethically wrong to offend people.

14 4 A 4) It s ethically wrong to offend people because anything that makes people unhappy is ethically wrong. Consequently, who can deny that there should be a law against it?. There should be a law against offending people.. It s ethically wrong to offend people. 3. Anything that makes people unhappy is ethically wrong. A B 5) Isn t it obvious that racist remarks are ignorant and insulting? This goes to show that such remarks are offensive.. Racist remarks are offensive.. Racist remarks are ignorant and insulting. 6) Teach children not to make racist remarks. After all, isn t it obvious that racist remarks are ignorant and insulting? This goes to show that such remarks are offensive.. Children should be taught not to make racist remarks.. Racist remarks are offensive. 3. Racist remarks are ignorant and insulting. 3 A B 7) Have you ever wondered why some people are so easily offended? Many people are easily offended because they have low self-esteem stemming from mistreatment in childhood. When you think about how the most cutting insults prey upon a pre-existing insecurity, this is hardly surprising.

15 5 This passage contains an explanation of why. 8) It s common, today, to urge people to be inoffensive, as though it s ethically wrong to offend someone. What rubbish! There s nothing morally wrong with offending somebody since inasmuch as nobody has any responsibility for another person s feelings, you can t blame somebody for making another person feel bad.. It isn t ethically wrong to offend someone.. Nobody has any responsibility for another person s feelings. 3. You can t blame somebody for making another person feel bad.