Assignment Prompt & Instructions
**files (2)**
– ## Template-PHIL341SignatureAssignment10182024.docx
– ## Instructionssignature.pdf
**## Template-PHIL341SignatureAssignment10182024.docx**
2
2
**Title of Video You Analyzed**
Your Name Here
West Coast University
PHIL 341: Critical Reasoning
Faculty Name
The Date Here
**Week 8 Signature Assignment**
**Introduction**
Only sited for the ted talk Begin by providing a brief introduction that specifies the TedTalk you selected and general overview of the video. In your paper you will want to reference concepts and information from our textbook. Use the following format should follow the format (Moore & Parker, 2021) for paraphrasing and (Moore & Parker, 2021, p. #) for direct quotes. When referencing class videos, use (Instructor name, n.d.) for paraphrasing, and when quoting from a video, include the specific time stamp where the information can be located, such as (Instructor name, n.d., 1:21). If there is no timeline provided on a video, it is best to paraphrase rather than quote. In APA format, if you are citing sources by the same author and with the same publication year, you differentiate them by adding lowercase letters (a, b, c, etc.) after the publication year within the in-text citations. This allows you to distinguish between the sources in your text and match them with the corresponding full citations in your reference list. For example:
– (Author, Yeara)
– (Author, Yearb)
Make sure to list these sources alphabetically in your reference list, organized by the lowercase letter assigned.
**The Argument and Syllogism**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Summarize the overall argument of the video in your own words. Be sure to include details and the main points the speaker used to make the argument.
Identify the three parts of the syllogism the speaker uses to make the overall argument:
·
**Major Premise:** Write the major premise in one to two sentences. A major premise is the main idea of an argument. It's the big, general statement at the beginning that sets the stage for the whole discussion. From there, more specific details are shared, leading to a final conclusion. Think of the major premise as an overarching statement that provides the context for the argument, guiding the development of the rest of the points and ideas.
·
**Minor Premise:** Write the minor premise in one to two sentences. The minor premise is often a specific example that helps support the main idea in an argument. It adds details that show how the big idea applies to a particular situation. By giving specific examples and details, the minor premise helps strengthen the overall argument. It works together with the major premise to build a logical case that leads to a final conclusion.
·
**Conclusion:** Write a conclusion in one to two sentences. A conclusion is the outcome of a logical argument derived from the premises presented. It is the final statement based on the evidence in the major and minor premises.
**Testing the Syllogism**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Based on the syllogism presented in Part 1 B, is this argument employing inductive or deductive reasoning? Support your choice with evidence. If the argument is deductive, analyze your syllogism from Part 1 B in terms of logical validity and soundness. Provide an evaluation that not only determines if the syllogism is both valid and sound, but also explains the reasoning behind your decision. If the argument utilizes an inductive approach, evaluate your syllogism from Part 1 B based on its strength as an inductive argument. Provide a critique that shows whether the syllogism is stronger or weaker, and clarify the rationale for your assessment.
**Rhetorical Appeals**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Identify examples of all three rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, and logos) that you noticed in this video and what information from the video has led you to your choices. Be sure to select specific words, phrases, or ideas and explain their connections to each type of appeal. Also, indicate what effect the use of these appeals has on the persuasiveness of the argument.
**Logical Fallacies**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Identify at least one specific logical fallacy from our textbook that was found in the video you selected. Be sure to define the fallacy and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also, discuss whether you think the use of the logical fallacy was deliberate or not and assess the effect that each one has on the argument.
**Moral Reasoning**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Which specific kind of moral reasoning is demonstrated in your topic? Choose from the following: Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics, Moral Relativism, or Cultural Relativism. Information about these ethical perspectives in located in Chapter 12 and you can also find more information in the study guide located in the Doc Sharing link under Modules. Briefly elaborate on why you chose the one you did. Be sure to define the specific kind of moral reasoning you chose from the list above and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also, discuss whether the use of this kind of moral reasoning was deliberate and what effect it has on the persuasiveness of the argument.
**Reaction and Reflection**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph that offers your position on the argument presented in the video you selected. Using your critical thinking skills to explain whether the speaker's argument was effective or ineffective and why.
**Conclusion**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph that explores the positive implications and negative consequences of the critical reasoning concepts utilized in both your paper and the video. This paragraph should be comprehensive enough to showcase how these concepts were applied and their impacts. This is the conclusion to your paper and should not include any new materials or concepts.
**References**
Moore, B.N., & Parker, R. (2021).
_Critical thinking_ (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Speaker's Last Name, First Initial. (date of TED Talk). Title of TED Talk [Video]. TED Conferences. URL
Instructor last name, first initial (N.D.) Week # and Video name in Canvas. [Video]. Canvas@WCU.
[https://canvas.westcoastuniversity.edu/](https://canvas.westcoastuniversity.edu/)
References should be listed in alphabetical order
APA 7 is different from APA 6. Here is a website covering some key differences:
[https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/apa-seventh-edition-changes/](https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/apa-seventh-edition-changes/).
**## Instructionssignature.pdf**
Instructions: also im adding another pdf which is the template you have to follow and
it has more information for every paragraph
The Signature Assignment for this course combines all the concepts you have
explored in this term. In this assignment, you will choose one of the TED Talks below
and form a response based on the provided guidance using . As you respond to the
questions, you will be expected to connect the concepts covered in this course to the
information in your chosen video.
As you develop your Signature Assignment, it is a mandatory requirement to
support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook. These citations are
essential for substantiating your claims and demonstrating your understanding of the
course concepts.
Please ensure that you use the template and follow APA format for your paper,
including a title page, in-text citations, and a reference page. Incorrect or missing
citations may impact your grade, so be diligent in citing the textbook appropriately.
Please choose ONE of the following TED Talks to respond to.
● TED. (2019, October). Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching /
Dawne Ware
● Links to an external site.
● [Video]. TED Talk: Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2017, October). Money and Morals: The Art of Philosophic Investing
/ Henrik Syse [Video]. TED Talk: Money and Morals: The Art of Philosphic
Investing
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2021, August). AI Isn't as Smart as You Think–But It Could Be / Jeff
Dean [Video]. TED Talk: AI Isn't as Smart as You Think– But It Could Be
● Links to an external site.
●
For each number below, complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough
to demonstrate your understanding of the subject matter of the class.
1. The Argument and Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and
thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your
understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Summarize the overall argument of the video in your
own words. Be sure to include details and the main
points the speaker used to make the argument.
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
B. Identify the three parts of the syllogism the speaker
uses to make the overall argument:
■ Major Premise
■ Minor Premise
■ Conclusion
2. Testing the Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Based upon the syllogism (your answer to Part 1. B),
does this argument demonstrate inductive or
deductive reasoning? Provide support for your
choice. Be sure to only choose deductive OR
inductive; you cannot choose both or neither.
B. If the argument is deductive, test your syllogism (your
answers to Part 1. B) in terms of logical validity and
soundness. Be sure to not only tell if the syllogism is
valid and sound but also show how/how not or
why/why not. If the argument is inductive, test your
syllogism (your answers from Part 1. B) in terms of
being a stronger or weaker inductive argument. Be
sure to not only tell if the syllogism is stronger or
weaker but also show how or why.
3. Rhetorical Appeals: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify examples of all three rhetorical appeals
(ethos, pathos, and logos) that you noticed in this
video and what information from the video has led
you to your choices. Be sure to select specific words,
phrases, or ideas and explain their connections to
each type of appeal. Also, indicate what effect the
use of these appeals has on the persuasiveness of
the argument.
4. Rhetorical Devices and Logical Fallacies: Complete a
thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate
your understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify at least one specific rhetorical device and one
specific logical fallacy in the way this topic is
presented. Be sure to define the rhetorical device and
fallacy and demonstrate how or why the source
employs them. Also, discuss whether you think the
use of each device and fallacy was deliberate or not
and assess the effect that each one has on the
argument.
B. NOTE: Remember, ethos, pathos, and logos are
rhetorical appeals, NOT devices, so they are not what
is being asked here. This is asking about rhetorical
devices.
5. Moral Reasoning: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Which specific kind of moral reasoning is demonstrated in
your topic? Briefly elaborate on why you chose the one you did.
Be sure to define the specific kind of moral reasoning you chose
and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also,
discuss whether the use of this kind of moral reasoning was
deliberate and what effect it has on the persuasiveness of the
argument.
6. Reaction and Reflection: Offer your position on the argument
presented in the video you selected. Using your critical thinking
skills, explain whether the speaker's argument was effective or
ineffective, and why.
7. Conclusion: What are the positive implications and negative
consequences for the critical reasoning concepts that were
used throughout your paper and in the video?
When completing this assignment, please keep the following in mind:
● Use the provided template.
● First and third person (I, we, her, him, they) are fine for this assignment,
but do not use second person (you, your).
● Include a title page, indicating which topic you chose.
● Adhere to basic APA formatting, including:
○ 12-point Times New Roman font
○ Double-spaced text
○ 1-inch margins throughout
● Support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook.
● Cite any outside sources that you used to support your ideas in proper
APA format with in-text citations and references.
● Be sure to review the associated rubric for more guidance on the content
that your response is expected to contain.
PHIL 341 BL Signature Assignment Final
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Understanding
the Arguments
Does the
student
demonstrate the
ability to discern
the speaker's 1)
issue, 2) target
audience, 3)
conclusion, 3)
main points,
and 4) unstated,
implied, or
assumed
perspectives.
Does the
student
accurately and
faithfully
summarize
them in the
student’s own
words in detail
without being
too reductive or
without
oversimplifying
the source’s
points?
40 to >37.2 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student is specific and
detailed in describing the speaker’s position and main ideas. The
student can systematically explain what the speaker’s claims are and
describe how the speaker’s claims relate to one another, exemplifying
sophistication, and comprehension. The student clearly identifies the
source’s target audience.
37.2 to >34.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student describes the
speaker’s position and main ideas and identifies the source’s target
audience.
34 to >28.8 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student generalizes or
oversimplifies the speaker’s claims, and/or may have trouble
expressing how the points relate to one another. The student may not
clearly identify the target audience.
28.8 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student misinterprets
or misrepresents the source’s claims, and/or how the claims relate to
one another. The student reacts personally or shows little
understanding of the target audience.
40
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Identifying and
Applying
Course
Concepts
Does the
student
accurately
identify and
define the
course terms
and ideas
indicated by the
prompts? The
student can
correctly identify
course
concepts
including
objectivity/subje
ctivity,
facts/beliefs/ide
as, fallacies,
biases,
rhetorical
devices/appeals
, valid and
sound
deductive
syllogisms,
stronger or
weaker
inductive
syllogisms, and
various types of
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student accurately and
adeptly identifies and defines all the course terms and ideas indicated
by the prompts, exemplifying sophistication and comprehension.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student accurately
identifies and defines most of the course terms and ideas indicated by
the prompts.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student identifies
and defines all of the course terms and ideas indicated by the
prompts, but they may be generalized, incomplete, or oversimplified.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
accurately identify or define the course concepts indicated by the
prompts, or egregiously misinterprets those course concepts.
30
pts
moral
reasoning.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Analysis and
Evaluation of
Course
Concepts
Can the student
explain if the
source’s use of
course
concepts are
effective or
ineffective, and
why they would
be effective or
ineffective to
the target
audience? The
“Exceeds”
response
assumes the
student
understands
who the target
audience is and
can posit how
that audience
may respond to
different
arguments and
rhetoric. They
are explaining
why a specific
rhetorical
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student understands
who the target audience is and can posit how the audience may
respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also
explain why a specific course concepts improve or diminish the
effectiveness of other course concepts.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student understands who
the target audience is and can posit how the audience may respond to
different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also explain why
specific course concepts are generally effective or ineffective and
provides a detailed rationale for their assertions.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student may
generally understand who the target audience is and may posit how
the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student inadequately or inaccurately explains why a specific course
concept is effective or ineffective and provides a detailed rationale for
their assertions.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
understand who the target audience is, nor can they posit how the
audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student does not explain why specific course concepts are generally
effective or ineffective.
30
pts
strategy works
on the target
audience or
how a fallacy
like ad
hominem preys
on an in-group
bias.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
General Writing
Mechanics
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe writing demonstrates
sophisticated clarity and conciseness and is extremely well organized.
Punctuation, spelling, and capitalization are all correct with minimal to
no errors.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe writing is clear, concise, and
well organized. May contain a few punctuation, spelling, or
capitalization errors.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsWriting lacks clarity,
conciseness, or organization. Several errors in punctuation, spelling,
and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe writing is unfocused
and poorly organized. Many errors in punctuation, spelling, and
capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
APA Style
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe assignment accurately and
consistently follows APA Style. Meets length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe assignment consistently
follows current APA Style with only isolated and inconsistent mistakes.
Mostly meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe assignment has
numerous errors in APA Style. Reflects incomplete knowledge of APA
Style. May not meet length and formatting requirements of the
assignment.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe assignment has
significant errors in APA Style. Does not meet length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Sources,
Citations and
References
10 to >9.0 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe required number of
relevant audience-appropriate sources have been expertly cited and
integrated into the content to support ideas.
9 to >8.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsMost sources are cited and
referenced correctly. Meets most of required sources for the
assignment.
8 to >7.0 ptsApproaches ExpectationsAt least one source is not
cited properly, not reputable, or is inappropriate for the audience or
topic.
7 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsDoes not meet the required
sources for the assignment. Sources are cited and referenced
incorrectly or missing.
10
pts
Total Points: 120
**## Instructionssignature.pdf**
Instructions: also im adding another pdf which is the template you have to follow and
it has more information for every paragraph
The Signature Assignment for this course combines all the concepts you have
explored in this term. In this assignment, you will choose one of the TED Talks below
and form a response based on the provided guidance using . As you respond to the
questions, you will be expected to connect the concepts covered in this course to the
information in your chosen video.
As you develop your Signature Assignment, it is a mandatory requirement to
support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook. These citations are
essential for substantiating your claims and demonstrating your understanding of the
course concepts.
Please ensure that you use the template and follow APA format for your paper,
including a title page, in-text citations, and a reference page. Incorrect or missing
citations may impact your grade, so be diligent in citing the textbook appropriately.
Please choose ONE of the following TED Talks to respond to.
● TED. (2019, October). Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching /
Dawne Ware
● Links to an external site.
● [Video]. TED Talk: Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2017, October). Money and Morals: The Art of Philosophic Investing
/ Henrik Syse [Video]. TED Talk: Money and Morals: The Art of Philosphic
Investing
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2021, August). AI Isn't as Smart as You Think–But It Could Be / Jeff
Dean [Video]. TED Talk: AI Isn't as Smart as You Think– But It Could Be
● Links to an external site.
●
For each number below, complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough
to demonstrate your understanding of the subject matter of the class.
1. The Argument and Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and
thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your
understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Summarize the overall argument of the video in your
own words. Be sure to include details and the main
points the speaker used to make the argument.
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
B. Identify the three parts of the syllogism the speaker
uses to make the overall argument:
■ Major Premise
■ Minor Premise
■ Conclusion
2. Testing the Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Based upon the syllogism (your answer to Part 1. B),
does this argument demonstrate inductive or
deductive reasoning? Provide support for your
choice. Be sure to only choose deductive OR
inductive; you cannot choose both or neither.
B. If the argument is deductive, test your syllogism (your
answers to Part 1. B) in terms of logical validity and
soundness. Be sure to not only tell if the syllogism is
valid and sound but also show how/how not or
why/why not. If the argument is inductive, test your
syllogism (your answers from Part 1. B) in terms of
being a stronger or weaker inductive argument. Be
sure to not only tell if the syllogism is stronger or
weaker but also show how or why.
3. Rhetorical Appeals: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify examples of all three rhetorical appeals
(ethos, pathos, and logos) that you noticed in this
video and what information from the video has led
you to your choices. Be sure to select specific words,
phrases, or ideas and explain their connections to
each type of appeal. Also, indicate what effect the
use of these appeals has on the persuasiveness of
the argument.
4. Rhetorical Devices and Logical Fallacies: Complete a
thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate
your understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify at least one specific rhetorical device and one
specific logical fallacy in the way this topic is
presented. Be sure to define the rhetorical device and
fallacy and demonstrate how or why the source
employs them. Also, discuss whether you think the
use of each device and fallacy was deliberate or not
and assess the effect that each one has on the
argument.
B. NOTE: Remember, ethos, pathos, and logos are
rhetorical appeals, NOT devices, so they are not what
is being asked here. This is asking about rhetorical
devices.
5. Moral Reasoning: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Which specific kind of moral reasoning is demonstrated in
your topic? Briefly elaborate on why you chose the one you did.
Be sure to define the specific kind of moral reasoning you chose
and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also,
discuss whether the use of this kind of moral reasoning was
deliberate and what effect it has on the persuasiveness of the
argument.
6. Reaction and Reflection: Offer your position on the argument
presented in the video you selected. Using your critical thinking
skills, explain whether the speaker's argument was effective or
ineffective, and why.
7. Conclusion: What are the positive implications and negative
consequences for the critical reasoning concepts that were
used throughout your paper and in the video?
When completing this assignment, please keep the following in mind:
● Use the provided template.
● First and third person (I, we, her, him, they) are fine for this assignment,
but do not use second person (you, your).
● Include a title page, indicating which topic you chose.
● Adhere to basic APA formatting, including:
○ 12-point Times New Roman font
○ Double-spaced text
○ 1-inch margins throughout
● Support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook.
● Cite any outside sources that you used to support your ideas in proper
APA format with in-text citations and references.
● Be sure to review the associated rubric for more guidance on the content
that your response is expected to contain.
PHIL 341 BL Signature Assignment Final
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Understanding
the Arguments
Does the
student
demonstrate the
ability to discern
the speaker's 1)
issue, 2) target
audience, 3)
conclusion, 3)
main points,
and 4) unstated,
implied, or
assumed
perspectives.
Does the
student
accurately and
faithfully
summarize
them in the
student’s own
words in detail
without being
too reductive or
without
oversimplifying
the source’s
points?
40 to >37.2 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student is specific and
detailed in describing the speaker’s position and main ideas. The
student can systematically explain what the speaker’s claims are and
describe how the speaker’s claims relate to one another, exemplifying
sophistication, and comprehension. The student clearly identifies the
source’s target audience.
37.2 to >34.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student describes the
speaker’s position and main ideas and identifies the source’s target
audience.
34 to >28.8 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student generalizes or
oversimplifies the speaker’s claims, and/or may have trouble
expressing how the points relate to one another. The student may not
clearly identify the target audience.
28.8 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student misinterprets
or misrepresents the source’s claims, and/or how the claims relate to
one another. The student reacts personally or shows little
understanding of the target audience.
40
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Identifying and
Applying
Course
Concepts
Does the
student
accurately
identify and
define the
course terms
and ideas
indicated by the
prompts? The
student can
correctly identify
course
concepts
including
objectivity/subje
ctivity,
facts/beliefs/ide
as, fallacies,
biases,
rhetorical
devices/appeals
, valid and
sound
deductive
syllogisms,
stronger or
weaker
inductive
syllogisms, and
various types of
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student accurately and
adeptly identifies and defines all the course terms and ideas indicated
by the prompts, exemplifying sophistication and comprehension.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student accurately
identifies and defines most of the course terms and ideas indicated by
the prompts.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student identifies
and defines all of the course terms and ideas indicated by the
prompts, but they may be generalized, incomplete, or oversimplified.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
accurately identify or define the course concepts indicated by the
prompts, or egregiously misinterprets those course concepts.
30
pts
moral
reasoning.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Analysis and
Evaluation of
Course
Concepts
Can the student
explain if the
source’s use of
course
concepts are
effective or
ineffective, and
why they would
be effective or
ineffective to
the target
audience? The
“Exceeds”
response
assumes the
student
understands
who the target
audience is and
can posit how
that audience
may respond to
different
arguments and
rhetoric. They
are explaining
why a specific
rhetorical
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student understands
who the target audience is and can posit how the audience may
respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also
explain why a specific course concepts improve or diminish the
effectiveness of other course concepts.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student understands who
the target audience is and can posit how the audience may respond to
different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also explain why
specific course concepts are generally effective or ineffective and
provides a detailed rationale for their assertions.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student may
generally understand who the target audience is and may posit how
the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student inadequately or inaccurately explains why a specific course
concept is effective or ineffective and provides a detailed rationale for
their assertions.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
understand who the target audience is, nor can they posit how the
audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student does not explain why specific course concepts are generally
effective or ineffective.
30
pts
strategy works
on the target
audience or
how a fallacy
like ad
hominem preys
on an in-group
bias.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
General Writing
Mechanics
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe writing demonstrates
sophisticated clarity and conciseness and is extremely well organized.
Punctuation, spelling, and capitalization are all correct with minimal to
no errors.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe writing is clear, concise, and
well organized. May contain a few punctuation, spelling, or
capitalization errors.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsWriting lacks clarity,
conciseness, or organization. Several errors in punctuation, spelling,
and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe writing is unfocused
and poorly organized. Many errors in punctuation, spelling, and
capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
APA Style
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe assignment accurately and
consistently follows APA Style. Meets length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe assignment consistently
follows current APA Style with only isolated and inconsistent mistakes.
Mostly meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe assignment has
numerous errors in APA Style. Reflects incomplete knowledge of APA
Style. May not meet length and formatting requirements of the
assignment.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe assignment has
significant errors in APA Style. Does not meet length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Sources,
Citations and
References
10 to >9.0 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe required number of
relevant audience-appropriate sources have been expertly cited and
integrated into the content to support ideas.
9 to >8.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsMost sources are cited and
referenced correctly. Meets most of required sources for the
assignment.
8 to >7.0 ptsApproaches ExpectationsAt least one source is not
cited properly, not reputable, or is inappropriate for the audience or
topic.
7 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsDoes not meet the required
sources for the assignment. Sources are cited and referenced
incorrectly or missing.
10
pts
Total Points: 120
**## Template-PHIL341SignatureAssignment10182024.docx**
2
2
**Title of Video You Analyzed**
Your Name Here
West Coast University
PHIL 341: Critical Reasoning
Faculty Name
The Date Here
**Week 8 Signature Assignment**
**Introduction**
Only sited for the ted talk Begin by providing a brief introduction that specifies the TedTalk you selected and general overview of the video. In your paper you will want to reference concepts and information from our textbook. Use the following format should follow the format (Moore & Parker, 2021) for paraphrasing and (Moore & Parker, 2021, p. #) for direct quotes. When referencing class videos, use (Instructor name, n.d.) for paraphrasing, and when quoting from a video, include the specific time stamp where the information can be located, such as (Instructor name, n.d., 1:21). If there is no timeline provided on a video, it is best to paraphrase rather than quote. In APA format, if you are citing sources by the same author and with the same publication year, you differentiate them by adding lowercase letters (a, b, c, etc.) after the publication year within the in-text citations. This allows you to distinguish between the sources in your text and match them with the corresponding full citations in your reference list. For example:
– (Author, Yeara)
– (Author, Yearb)
Make sure to list these sources alphabetically in your reference list, organized by the lowercase letter assigned.
**The Argument and Syllogism**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Summarize the overall argument of the video in your own words. Be sure to include details and the main points the speaker used to make the argument.
Identify the three parts of the syllogism the speaker uses to make the overall argument:
·
**Major Premise:** Write the major premise in one to two sentences. A major premise is the main idea of an argument. It's the big, general statement at the beginning that sets the stage for the whole discussion. From there, more specific details are shared, leading to a final conclusion. Think of the major premise as an overarching statement that provides the context for the argument, guiding the development of the rest of the points and ideas.
·
**Minor Premise:** Write the minor premise in one to two sentences. The minor premise is often a specific example that helps support the main idea in an argument. It adds details that show how the big idea applies to a particular situation. By giving specific examples and details, the minor premise helps strengthen the overall argument. It works together with the major premise to build a logical case that leads to a final conclusion.
·
**Conclusion:** Write a conclusion in one to two sentences. A conclusion is the outcome of a logical argument derived from the premises presented. It is the final statement based on the evidence in the major and minor premises.
**Testing the Syllogism**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Based on the syllogism presented in Part 1 B, is this argument employing inductive or deductive reasoning? Support your choice with evidence. If the argument is deductive, analyze your syllogism from Part 1 B in terms of logical validity and soundness. Provide an evaluation that not only determines if the syllogism is both valid and sound, but also explains the reasoning behind your decision. If the argument utilizes an inductive approach, evaluate your syllogism from Part 1 B based on its strength as an inductive argument. Provide a critique that shows whether the syllogism is stronger or weaker, and clarify the rationale for your assessment.
**Rhetorical Appeals**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Identify examples of all three rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, and logos) that you noticed in this video and what information from the video has led you to your choices. Be sure to select specific words, phrases, or ideas and explain their connections to each type of appeal. Also, indicate what effect the use of these appeals has on the persuasiveness of the argument.
**Logical Fallacies**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Identify at least one specific logical fallacy from our textbook that was found in the video you selected. Be sure to define the fallacy and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also, discuss whether you think the use of the logical fallacy was deliberate or not and assess the effect that each one has on the argument.
**Moral Reasoning**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Which specific kind of moral reasoning is demonstrated in your topic? Choose from the following: Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics, Moral Relativism, or Cultural Relativism. Information about these ethical perspectives in located in Chapter 12 and you can also find more information in the study guide located in the Doc Sharing link under Modules. Briefly elaborate on why you chose the one you did. Be sure to define the specific kind of moral reasoning you chose from the list above and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also, discuss whether the use of this kind of moral reasoning was deliberate and what effect it has on the persuasiveness of the argument.
**Reaction and Reflection**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph that offers your position on the argument presented in the video you selected. Using your critical thinking skills to explain whether the speaker's argument was effective or ineffective and why.
**Conclusion**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph that explores the positive implications and negative consequences of the critical reasoning concepts utilized in both your paper and the video. This paragraph should be comprehensive enough to showcase how these concepts were applied and their impacts. This is the conclusion to your paper and should not include any new materials or concepts.
**References**
Moore, B.N., & Parker, R. (2021).
_Critical thinking_ (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Speaker's Last Name, First Initial. (date of TED Talk). Title of TED Talk [Video]. TED Conferences. URL
Instructor last name, first initial (N.D.) Week # and Video name in Canvas. [Video]. Canvas@WCU.
[https://canvas.westcoastuniversity.edu/](https://canvas.westcoastuniversity.edu/)
References should be listed in alphabetical order
APA 7 is different from APA 6. Here is a website covering some key differences:
[https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/apa-seventh-edition-changes/](https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/apa-seventh-edition-changes/).
**## Instructionssignature.pdf**
Instructions: also im adding another pdf which is the template you have to follow and
it has more information for every paragraph
The Signature Assignment for this course combines all the concepts you have
explored in this term. In this assignment, you will choose one of the TED Talks below
and form a response based on the provided guidance using . As you respond to the
questions, you will be expected to connect the concepts covered in this course to the
information in your chosen video.
As you develop your Signature Assignment, it is a mandatory requirement to
support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook. These citations are
essential for substantiating your claims and demonstrating your understanding of the
course concepts.
Please ensure that you use the template and follow APA format for your paper,
including a title page, in-text citations, and a reference page. Incorrect or missing
citations may impact your grade, so be diligent in citing the textbook appropriately.
Please choose ONE of the following TED Talks to respond to.
● TED. (2019, October). Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching /
Dawne Ware
● Links to an external site.
● [Video]. TED Talk: Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2017, October). Money and Morals: The Art of Philosophic Investing
/ Henrik Syse [Video]. TED Talk: Money and Morals: The Art of Philosphic
Investing
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2021, August). AI Isn't as Smart as You Think–But It Could Be / Jeff
Dean [Video]. TED Talk: AI Isn't as Smart as You Think– But It Could Be
● Links to an external site.
●
For each number below, complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough
to demonstrate your understanding of the subject matter of the class.
1. The Argument and Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and
thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your
understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Summarize the overall argument of the video in your
own words. Be sure to include details and the main
points the speaker used to make the argument.
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
B. Identify the three parts of the syllogism the speaker
uses to make the overall argument:
■ Major Premise
■ Minor Premise
■ Conclusion
2. Testing the Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Based upon the syllogism (your answer to Part 1. B),
does this argument demonstrate inductive or
deductive reasoning? Provide support for your
choice. Be sure to only choose deductive OR
inductive; you cannot choose both or neither.
B. If the argument is deductive, test your syllogism (your
answers to Part 1. B) in terms of logical validity and
soundness. Be sure to not only tell if the syllogism is
valid and sound but also show how/how not or
why/why not. If the argument is inductive, test your
syllogism (your answers from Part 1. B) in terms of
being a stronger or weaker inductive argument. Be
sure to not only tell if the syllogism is stronger or
weaker but also show how or why.
3. Rhetorical Appeals: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify examples of all three rhetorical appeals
(ethos, pathos, and logos) that you noticed in this
video and what information from the video has led
you to your choices. Be sure to select specific words,
phrases, or ideas and explain their connections to
each type of appeal. Also, indicate what effect the
use of these appeals has on the persuasiveness of
the argument.
4. Rhetorical Devices and Logical Fallacies: Complete a
thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate
your understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify at least one specific rhetorical device and one
specific logical fallacy in the way this topic is
presented. Be sure to define the rhetorical device and
fallacy and demonstrate how or why the source
employs them. Also, discuss whether you think the
use of each device and fallacy was deliberate or not
and assess the effect that each one has on the
argument.
B. NOTE: Remember, ethos, pathos, and logos are
rhetorical appeals, NOT devices, so they are not what
is being asked here. This is asking about rhetorical
devices.
5. Moral Reasoning: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Which specific kind of moral reasoning is demonstrated in
your topic? Briefly elaborate on why you chose the one you did.
Be sure to define the specific kind of moral reasoning you chose
and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also,
discuss whether the use of this kind of moral reasoning was
deliberate and what effect it has on the persuasiveness of the
argument.
6. Reaction and Reflection: Offer your position on the argument
presented in the video you selected. Using your critical thinking
skills, explain whether the speaker's argument was effective or
ineffective, and why.
7. Conclusion: What are the positive implications and negative
consequences for the critical reasoning concepts that were
used throughout your paper and in the video?
When completing this assignment, please keep the following in mind:
● Use the provided template.
● First and third person (I, we, her, him, they) are fine for this assignment,
but do not use second person (you, your).
● Include a title page, indicating which topic you chose.
● Adhere to basic APA formatting, including:
○ 12-point Times New Roman font
○ Double-spaced text
○ 1-inch margins throughout
● Support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook.
● Cite any outside sources that you used to support your ideas in proper
APA format with in-text citations and references.
● Be sure to review the associated rubric for more guidance on the content
that your response is expected to contain.
PHIL 341 BL Signature Assignment Final
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Understanding
the Arguments
Does the
student
demonstrate the
ability to discern
the speaker's 1)
issue, 2) target
audience, 3)
conclusion, 3)
main points,
and 4) unstated,
implied, or
assumed
perspectives.
Does the
student
accurately and
faithfully
summarize
them in the
student’s own
words in detail
without being
too reductive or
without
oversimplifying
the source’s
points?
40 to >37.2 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student is specific and
detailed in describing the speaker’s position and main ideas. The
student can systematically explain what the speaker’s claims are and
describe how the speaker’s claims relate to one another, exemplifying
sophistication, and comprehension. The student clearly identifies the
source’s target audience.
37.2 to >34.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student describes the
speaker’s position and main ideas and identifies the source’s target
audience.
34 to >28.8 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student generalizes or
oversimplifies the speaker’s claims, and/or may have trouble
expressing how the points relate to one another. The student may not
clearly identify the target audience.
28.8 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student misinterprets
or misrepresents the source’s claims, and/or how the claims relate to
one another. The student reacts personally or shows little
understanding of the target audience.
40
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Identifying and
Applying
Course
Concepts
Does the
student
accurately
identify and
define the
course terms
and ideas
indicated by the
prompts? The
student can
correctly identify
course
concepts
including
objectivity/subje
ctivity,
facts/beliefs/ide
as, fallacies,
biases,
rhetorical
devices/appeals
, valid and
sound
deductive
syllogisms,
stronger or
weaker
inductive
syllogisms, and
various types of
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student accurately and
adeptly identifies and defines all the course terms and ideas indicated
by the prompts, exemplifying sophistication and comprehension.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student accurately
identifies and defines most of the course terms and ideas indicated by
the prompts.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student identifies
and defines all of the course terms and ideas indicated by the
prompts, but they may be generalized, incomplete, or oversimplified.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
accurately identify or define the course concepts indicated by the
prompts, or egregiously misinterprets those course concepts.
30
pts
moral
reasoning.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Analysis and
Evaluation of
Course
Concepts
Can the student
explain if the
source’s use of
course
concepts are
effective or
ineffective, and
why they would
be effective or
ineffective to
the target
audience? The
“Exceeds”
response
assumes the
student
understands
who the target
audience is and
can posit how
that audience
may respond to
different
arguments and
rhetoric. They
are explaining
why a specific
rhetorical
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student understands
who the target audience is and can posit how the audience may
respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also
explain why a specific course concepts improve or diminish the
effectiveness of other course concepts.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student understands who
the target audience is and can posit how the audience may respond to
different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also explain why
specific course concepts are generally effective or ineffective and
provides a detailed rationale for their assertions.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student may
generally understand who the target audience is and may posit how
the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student inadequately or inaccurately explains why a specific course
concept is effective or ineffective and provides a detailed rationale for
their assertions.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
understand who the target audience is, nor can they posit how the
audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student does not explain why specific course concepts are generally
effective or ineffective.
30
pts
strategy works
on the target
audience or
how a fallacy
like ad
hominem preys
on an in-group
bias.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
General Writing
Mechanics
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe writing demonstrates
sophisticated clarity and conciseness and is extremely well organized.
Punctuation, spelling, and capitalization are all correct with minimal to
no errors.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe writing is clear, concise, and
well organized. May contain a few punctuation, spelling, or
capitalization errors.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsWriting lacks clarity,
conciseness, or organization. Several errors in punctuation, spelling,
and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe writing is unfocused
and poorly organized. Many errors in punctuation, spelling, and
capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
APA Style
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe assignment accurately and
consistently follows APA Style. Meets length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe assignment consistently
follows current APA Style with only isolated and inconsistent mistakes.
Mostly meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe assignment has
numerous errors in APA Style. Reflects incomplete knowledge of APA
Style. May not meet length and formatting requirements of the
assignment.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe assignment has
significant errors in APA Style. Does not meet length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Sources,
Citations and
References
10 to >9.0 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe required number of
relevant audience-appropriate sources have been expertly cited and
integrated into the content to support ideas.
9 to >8.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsMost sources are cited and
referenced correctly. Meets most of required sources for the
assignment.
8 to >7.0 ptsApproaches ExpectationsAt least one source is not
cited properly, not reputable, or is inappropriate for the audience or
topic.
7 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsDoes not meet the required
sources for the assignment. Sources are cited and referenced
incorrectly or missing.
10
pts
Total Points: 120
**## Template-PHIL341SignatureAssignment10182024.docx**
2
2
**Title of Video You Analyzed**
Your Name Here
West Coast University
PHIL 341: Critical Reasoning
Faculty Name
The Date Here
**Week 8 Signature Assignment**
**Introduction**
Only sited for the ted talk Begin by providing a brief introduction that specifies the TedTalk you selected and general overview of the video. In your paper you will want to reference concepts and information from our textbook. Use the following format should follow the format (Moore & Parker, 2021) for paraphrasing and (Moore & Parker, 2021, p. #) for direct quotes. When referencing class videos, use (Instructor name, n.d.) for paraphrasing, and when quoting from a video, include the specific time stamp where the information can be located, such as (Instructor name, n.d., 1:21). If there is no timeline provided on a video, it is best to paraphrase rather than quote. In APA format, if you are citing sources by the same author and with the same publication year, you differentiate them by adding lowercase letters (a, b, c, etc.) after the publication year within the in-text citations. This allows you to distinguish between the sources in your text and match them with the corresponding full citations in your reference list. For example:
– (Author, Yeara)
– (Author, Yearb)
Make sure to list these sources alphabetically in your reference list, organized by the lowercase letter assigned.
**The Argument and Syllogism**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Summarize the overall argument of the video in your own words. Be sure to include details and the main points the speaker used to make the argument.
Identify the three parts of the syllogism the speaker uses to make the overall argument:
·
**Major Premise:** Write the major premise in one to two sentences. A major premise is the main idea of an argument. It's the big, general statement at the beginning that sets the stage for the whole discussion. From there, more specific details are shared, leading to a final conclusion. Think of the major premise as an overarching statement that provides the context for the argument, guiding the development of the rest of the points and ideas.
·
**Minor Premise:** Write the minor premise in one to two sentences. The minor premise is often a specific example that helps support the main idea in an argument. It adds details that show how the big idea applies to a particular situation. By giving specific examples and details, the minor premise helps strengthen the overall argument. It works together with the major premise to build a logical case that leads to a final conclusion.
·
**Conclusion:** Write a conclusion in one to two sentences. A conclusion is the outcome of a logical argument derived from the premises presented. It is the final statement based on the evidence in the major and minor premises.
**Testing the Syllogism**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Based on the syllogism presented in Part 1 B, is this argument employing inductive or deductive reasoning? Support your choice with evidence. If the argument is deductive, analyze your syllogism from Part 1 B in terms of logical validity and soundness. Provide an evaluation that not only determines if the syllogism is both valid and sound, but also explains the reasoning behind your decision. If the argument utilizes an inductive approach, evaluate your syllogism from Part 1 B based on its strength as an inductive argument. Provide a critique that shows whether the syllogism is stronger or weaker, and clarify the rationale for your assessment.
**Rhetorical Appeals**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Identify examples of all three rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, and logos) that you noticed in this video and what information from the video has led you to your choices. Be sure to select specific words, phrases, or ideas and explain their connections to each type of appeal. Also, indicate what effect the use of these appeals has on the persuasiveness of the argument.
**Logical Fallacies**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Identify at least one specific logical fallacy from our textbook that was found in the video you selected. Be sure to define the fallacy and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also, discuss whether you think the use of the logical fallacy was deliberate or not and assess the effect that each one has on the argument.
**Moral Reasoning**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of the course concepts indicated. Which specific kind of moral reasoning is demonstrated in your topic? Choose from the following: Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics, Moral Relativism, or Cultural Relativism. Information about these ethical perspectives in located in Chapter 12 and you can also find more information in the study guide located in the Doc Sharing link under Modules. Briefly elaborate on why you chose the one you did. Be sure to define the specific kind of moral reasoning you chose from the list above and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also, discuss whether the use of this kind of moral reasoning was deliberate and what effect it has on the persuasiveness of the argument.
**Reaction and Reflection**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph that offers your position on the argument presented in the video you selected. Using your critical thinking skills to explain whether the speaker's argument was effective or ineffective and why.
**Conclusion**
Complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph that explores the positive implications and negative consequences of the critical reasoning concepts utilized in both your paper and the video. This paragraph should be comprehensive enough to showcase how these concepts were applied and their impacts. This is the conclusion to your paper and should not include any new materials or concepts.
**References**
Moore, B.N., & Parker, R. (2021).
_Critical thinking_ (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Speaker's Last Name, First Initial. (date of TED Talk). Title of TED Talk [Video]. TED Conferences. URL
Instructor last name, first initial (N.D.) Week # and Video name in Canvas. [Video]. Canvas@WCU.
[https://canvas.westcoastuniversity.edu/](https://canvas.westcoastuniversity.edu/)
References should be listed in alphabetical order
APA 7 is different from APA 6. Here is a website covering some key differences:
[https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/apa-seventh-edition-changes/](https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/apa-seventh-edition-changes/).
**## Instructionssignature.pdf**
Instructions: also im adding another pdf which is the template you have to follow and
it has more information for every paragraph
The Signature Assignment for this course combines all the concepts you have
explored in this term. In this assignment, you will choose one of the TED Talks below
and form a response based on the provided guidance using . As you respond to the
questions, you will be expected to connect the concepts covered in this course to the
information in your chosen video.
As you develop your Signature Assignment, it is a mandatory requirement to
support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook. These citations are
essential for substantiating your claims and demonstrating your understanding of the
course concepts.
Please ensure that you use the template and follow APA format for your paper,
including a title page, in-text citations, and a reference page. Incorrect or missing
citations may impact your grade, so be diligent in citing the textbook appropriately.
Please choose ONE of the following TED Talks to respond to.
● TED. (2019, October). Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching /
Dawne Ware
● Links to an external site.
● [Video]. TED Talk: Ethics: Yes, Even When Nobody is Watching
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2017, October). Money and Morals: The Art of Philosophic Investing
/ Henrik Syse [Video]. TED Talk: Money and Morals: The Art of Philosphic
Investing
● Links to an external site.
●
● TED. (2021, August). AI Isn't as Smart as You Think–But It Could Be / Jeff
Dean [Video]. TED Talk: AI Isn't as Smart as You Think– But It Could Be
● Links to an external site.
●
For each number below, complete a thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough
to demonstrate your understanding of the subject matter of the class.
1. The Argument and Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and
thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate your
understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Summarize the overall argument of the video in your
own words. Be sure to include details and the main
points the speaker used to make the argument.
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/dawne_ware_ethics_yes_even_when_nobody_is_watching?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en](https://www.ted.com/talks/henrik_syse_money_and_morals_the_art_of_philosophic_investing?subtitle=en)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
[https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be](https://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_dean_ai_isn_t_as_smart_as_you_think_but_it_could_be)
B. Identify the three parts of the syllogism the speaker
uses to make the overall argument:
■ Major Premise
■ Minor Premise
■ Conclusion
2. Testing the Syllogism: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Based upon the syllogism (your answer to Part 1. B),
does this argument demonstrate inductive or
deductive reasoning? Provide support for your
choice. Be sure to only choose deductive OR
inductive; you cannot choose both or neither.
B. If the argument is deductive, test your syllogism (your
answers to Part 1. B) in terms of logical validity and
soundness. Be sure to not only tell if the syllogism is
valid and sound but also show how/how not or
why/why not. If the argument is inductive, test your
syllogism (your answers from Part 1. B) in terms of
being a stronger or weaker inductive argument. Be
sure to not only tell if the syllogism is stronger or
weaker but also show how or why.
3. Rhetorical Appeals: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify examples of all three rhetorical appeals
(ethos, pathos, and logos) that you noticed in this
video and what information from the video has led
you to your choices. Be sure to select specific words,
phrases, or ideas and explain their connections to
each type of appeal. Also, indicate what effect the
use of these appeals has on the persuasiveness of
the argument.
4. Rhetorical Devices and Logical Fallacies: Complete a
thoughtful and thorough paragraph long enough to demonstrate
your understanding of the course concepts indicated.
A. Identify at least one specific rhetorical device and one
specific logical fallacy in the way this topic is
presented. Be sure to define the rhetorical device and
fallacy and demonstrate how or why the source
employs them. Also, discuss whether you think the
use of each device and fallacy was deliberate or not
and assess the effect that each one has on the
argument.
B. NOTE: Remember, ethos, pathos, and logos are
rhetorical appeals, NOT devices, so they are not what
is being asked here. This is asking about rhetorical
devices.
5. Moral Reasoning: Complete a thoughtful and thorough
paragraph long enough to demonstrate your understanding of
the course concepts indicated.
A. Which specific kind of moral reasoning is demonstrated in
your topic? Briefly elaborate on why you chose the one you did.
Be sure to define the specific kind of moral reasoning you chose
and demonstrate how or why the source employs them. Also,
discuss whether the use of this kind of moral reasoning was
deliberate and what effect it has on the persuasiveness of the
argument.
6. Reaction and Reflection: Offer your position on the argument
presented in the video you selected. Using your critical thinking
skills, explain whether the speaker's argument was effective or
ineffective, and why.
7. Conclusion: What are the positive implications and negative
consequences for the critical reasoning concepts that were
used throughout your paper and in the video?
When completing this assignment, please keep the following in mind:
● Use the provided template.
● First and third person (I, we, her, him, they) are fine for this assignment,
but do not use second person (you, your).
● Include a title page, indicating which topic you chose.
● Adhere to basic APA formatting, including:
○ 12-point Times New Roman font
○ Double-spaced text
○ 1-inch margins throughout
● Support your logic with in-text citations from our textbook.
● Cite any outside sources that you used to support your ideas in proper
APA format with in-text citations and references.
● Be sure to review the associated rubric for more guidance on the content
that your response is expected to contain.
PHIL 341 BL Signature Assignment Final
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Understanding
the Arguments
Does the
student
demonstrate the
ability to discern
the speaker's 1)
issue, 2) target
audience, 3)
conclusion, 3)
main points,
and 4) unstated,
implied, or
assumed
perspectives.
Does the
student
accurately and
faithfully
summarize
them in the
student’s own
words in detail
without being
too reductive or
without
oversimplifying
the source’s
points?
40 to >37.2 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student is specific and
detailed in describing the speaker’s position and main ideas. The
student can systematically explain what the speaker’s claims are and
describe how the speaker’s claims relate to one another, exemplifying
sophistication, and comprehension. The student clearly identifies the
source’s target audience.
37.2 to >34.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student describes the
speaker’s position and main ideas and identifies the source’s target
audience.
34 to >28.8 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student generalizes or
oversimplifies the speaker’s claims, and/or may have trouble
expressing how the points relate to one another. The student may not
clearly identify the target audience.
28.8 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student misinterprets
or misrepresents the source’s claims, and/or how the claims relate to
one another. The student reacts personally or shows little
understanding of the target audience.
40
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Identifying and
Applying
Course
Concepts
Does the
student
accurately
identify and
define the
course terms
and ideas
indicated by the
prompts? The
student can
correctly identify
course
concepts
including
objectivity/subje
ctivity,
facts/beliefs/ide
as, fallacies,
biases,
rhetorical
devices/appeals
, valid and
sound
deductive
syllogisms,
stronger or
weaker
inductive
syllogisms, and
various types of
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student accurately and
adeptly identifies and defines all the course terms and ideas indicated
by the prompts, exemplifying sophistication and comprehension.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student accurately
identifies and defines most of the course terms and ideas indicated by
the prompts.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student identifies
and defines all of the course terms and ideas indicated by the
prompts, but they may be generalized, incomplete, or oversimplified.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
accurately identify or define the course concepts indicated by the
prompts, or egregiously misinterprets those course concepts.
30
pts
moral
reasoning.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Analysis and
Evaluation of
Course
Concepts
Can the student
explain if the
source’s use of
course
concepts are
effective or
ineffective, and
why they would
be effective or
ineffective to
the target
audience? The
“Exceeds”
response
assumes the
student
understands
who the target
audience is and
can posit how
that audience
may respond to
different
arguments and
rhetoric. They
are explaining
why a specific
rhetorical
30 to >27.75 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe student understands
who the target audience is and can posit how the audience may
respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also
explain why a specific course concepts improve or diminish the
effectiveness of other course concepts.
27.75 to >25.5 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe student understands who
the target audience is and can posit how the audience may respond to
different arguments and rhetoric. The student may also explain why
specific course concepts are generally effective or ineffective and
provides a detailed rationale for their assertions.
25.5 to >21.6 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe student may
generally understand who the target audience is and may posit how
the audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student inadequately or inaccurately explains why a specific course
concept is effective or ineffective and provides a detailed rationale for
their assertions.
21.6 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe student does not
understand who the target audience is, nor can they posit how the
audience may respond to different arguments and rhetoric. The
student does not explain why specific course concepts are generally
effective or ineffective.
30
pts
strategy works
on the target
audience or
how a fallacy
like ad
hominem preys
on an in-group
bias.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
General Writing
Mechanics
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe writing demonstrates
sophisticated clarity and conciseness and is extremely well organized.
Punctuation, spelling, and capitalization are all correct with minimal to
no errors.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe writing is clear, concise, and
well organized. May contain a few punctuation, spelling, or
capitalization errors.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsWriting lacks clarity,
conciseness, or organization. Several errors in punctuation, spelling,
and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe writing is unfocused
and poorly organized. Many errors in punctuation, spelling, and
capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
APA Style
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe assignment accurately and
consistently follows APA Style. Meets length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
4.5 to >4.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe assignment consistently
follows current APA Style with only isolated and inconsistent mistakes.
Mostly meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
4 to >3.5 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe assignment has
numerous errors in APA Style. Reflects incomplete knowledge of APA
Style. May not meet length and formatting requirements of the
assignment.
3.5 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsThe assignment has
significant errors in APA Style. Does not meet length and formatting
requirements of the assignment.
5
pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Sources,
Citations and
References
10 to >9.0 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe required number of
relevant audience-appropriate sources have been expertly cited and
integrated into the content to support ideas.
9 to >8.0 ptsMeets ExpectationsMost sources are cited and
referenced correctly. Meets most of required sources for the
assignment.
8 to >7.0 ptsApproaches ExpectationsAt least one source is not
cited properly, not reputable, or is inappropriate for the audience or
topic.
7 to >0 ptsDoes Not Meet ExpectationsDoes not meet the required
sources for the assignment. Sources are cited and referenced
incorrectly or missing.
10
pts
Total Points: 120