Reference no: EM13373940 , Length: 3491 words

Find the Opposing Viewpoints in Context database at the University Library by logging into to the Library and selecting the Specialized Resources link. From the results page, scroll down to select the Opposing Viewpoints in Context link.


• Find each of the following four articles by going to Advanced Search (under the Search box) within the Opposing Viewpoints database. Enter the article's Document Number (the number preceding the title below) into the box next to "Search for" and then select Document Number in the drop down box. Make sure there are no typed spaces following the Document ID in the search box. Then click Search.

EJ3010118270 - Hate Speech on the Internet Should Be Regulated
EJ3010118271 - Hate Speech on the Internet Should Not Be Regulated
EJ3010725203 - Character Education Cannot Work in Public School
EJ3010725208 - Public Schools Must Revive Moral Education

Use the forms in Appendix R to critically analyze these four sources. Fill out one form for each source.
Be sure to quote or accurately paraphrase the text of your sources whenever you are asked to "identify" items in the text, and be sure to explain why you've chosen that text to support your answer. When responding to the instructions to "identify and name any fallacies used by the author," for example, don't simply name a fallacy. Quote or accurately paraphrase the passage where the fallacy occurs and then explain how it occurs. Students cannot reasonably expect to receive credit simply for listing the names of fallacies, rhetorical devices, etc.
Make an effort to find different rhetorical devices and fallacies in each of the four sources. Students will not receive full credit for repeatedly identifying the same rhetorical device or fallacy throughout the four sources when examples of other rhetorical devices or fallacies can be found.
Appendix R will ask you to address the following for each of the sources you analyze:

• Identify the principal issue presented by the source. Remember, an issue is not a topic or a thesis.
• Identify any indications that the author is biased. Remember to describe people or things as "biased," not as "bias." A biased person is a person who has a bias.
• Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. Explain why they are vague or ambiguous.
• Do you find the author credible? Explain your reasoning.
• Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. Quote or accurately paraphrase the passage where the rhetorical device occurs and then explain how it occurs.
• Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. Quote or accurately paraphrase the passage where the fallacy occurs and then explain how it occurs.
• Identify and label the premises and conclusion of an argument made by the author, accurately paraphrasing the argument if necessary.
• Is the author's argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak? Explain how you determined this. Avoid simply reciting definitions.
• Does the author appeal to a moral principle in order to justify a position? Explain your answer and cite evidence from the text.