For this discussion board, evaluate the following argument:
Animals are not our friends, they are our food. This is because animals are not as intelligent as humans are, and thus don’t deserve the rights that humans have. My uncle, an electrician, told me that in order to be optimally healthy, I should eat at least 1-2 chickens a day. I think that if a cow had the chance to eat a person, it would, so why feel bad if you eat a hamburger? Human beings are at the top of the food chain, and because of this, we should do what we please to other animals. Lastly, my friend is vegan and she listens to Taylor Swift. Taylor Swift is the worst.
In 2-3 paragraphs:
- What are the premises? How do you know?
- What is the main conclusion? How do you know?
- Then, use the 5 Criteria for Evaluating Arguments to further assess the argument.
In 1-2 paragraphs:
Critique a classmate’s assessment (kindly). Do you think they were thorough in their evaluation? In what ways? Are there areas of their evaluation that can use improvement? Are their certain aspects of the argument they considered that you did not?
As always, be mindful of the rubric.
you have to response to this student paragraph (Premises are the statements given in an argument to help provide support and reasoning for the conclusion. In this specific argument, one of the premises states that because animals are not as intelligent as humans, we have the right to eat them. This statement is not based on credible facts more which means it is only an opinion. Another premise is since their uncle is an electrician, he recommended them to eat at least 1-2 chickens a day. There is no credibility that backs up what the electrician said. You shouldn’t feel bad eating meat because if the animal had the chance, they would eat you, is another premise in this argument because it is another statement that is used to back up the claim of this argument.
The conclusion to this argument is to have people think that humans are far more important than animals due to our rank of intelligence, therefore, we should not feel bad for eating animals because if they were in our position, they would do the same. The claims in this article are not reliable because they have no evidence backing them up.
5 Criteria for Evaluating Arguments:
1.Clarity: Animals are not as intelligent as humans are, therefore they don’t have the same rights.
2.Credibility: This argument is not credible due to it being only based on opinions.
3.Relevance- Mostly everything is relevant expect the statement about Taylor Swift.
4.Completeness- The beginning of the paragraph has nothing to do with the end conclusion.
5. Soundness- No, the premises in this argument are based on opinions and they do not support the conclusion.)
Originality and Thoughtfulness
______ (0-3 pts) Are your responses original, and not just regurgitated ideas? Do they show unique thought? Are you giving careful consideration to the questions asked or are your responses superficial and rushed?
______ (0-3 pts) Are your responses factually accurate, i.e. are you correctly applying key concepts and terminology? Do your responses show that you’ve actually done the readings and engaged with other assigned media?
Composition, Spelling, and Grammar
______ (0-2 pts) Is your language clear and precise college-level writing? Are you using correct terminology? Did you proofread your writing carefully? Do your responses meet the minimum length requirement?
______ (0-2 pts) Did you respond to at least one other post? Is your response appropriate? Is it just a simple comment, or does it add to the original poster’s ideas? Is it insightful?
Total points possible: 10