Category: Philosophy : Critical Thinking

Textbook: Chapter 12
Lesson 1, 2
The Doctors’ Choice is America’s Choice”: The Physician in US Cigarette Advertisements, 1930-1953Links to an external site.
The Opioid Epidemic: It’s Time to Place Blame Where It BelongsLinks to an external site.
Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook and noted readings)
Introduction
The medical profession has a muddled and contradictory association with its approach toward the tobacco industry. While the profession now firmly opposes to smoking and vigorously publicizes the serious, even fatal, health hazards associated with smoking, this was not always so. Advertisements for tobacco products, including cigarettes “… became a ready source of income for numerous medical organizations and journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), as well as many branches and bulletins of local medical associations” (Wolinsky & Brune, 1994). Physicians and reference to doctors and smoking were once common in tobacco industry advertisements. The story of physicians and promotion of smoking can be found in “The Doctors’ Choice Is America’s Choice” (Gardner & Brandt, 2006).
The role of physicians in the current opioid crisis is now under scrutiny on television (Farmer, 2019) by trade publications (King, 2018), peer-reviewed journals (deShazo, et al, 2018), and by physicians themselves (Hirsch, 2019).
Initial Post Instructions
For the initial post, research the history of the association of doctors with tobacco companies and tobacco advertising. Read about the association of doctors with the opioid crisis. Then, address the following:
In what way are the two situations comparable?
In what way are they different?
Apply the concept of moral equivalence. Is the conduct of doctors in relation to smoking and the tobacco industry morally equivalent to the conduct of doctors in the opioid crisis? Explain your position and be very specific.

Remember – these journal questions require more thinking than writing. Think about exactly what you are asked to do, and then write as economically as possible. 
Instructions
For this journal assignment, briefly answer each of the following prompts. For all instances where you are required to provide a definition, do not copy definitions from the text. Use your own words.
Self-Regulation
The textbook mentions the skill of self-regulation. How do you define this term? You may want to review Chapter 2 (to review critical thinking skills) before your write out your definition.
Sytem-1 and System-2
Define System-1 and System-2 thinking in your own words.
Give an example from your personal or work life where you would use each of them, explaining why each is appropriate to the situation in which you use it.
Heuristics
Define “heuristic” in your own words.
Give an example of a heuristic might be used in your personal or professional life and briefly show how it could have a positive or negative effect.
Do not use examples found in the text.
Dominance Structuring
Explain the term “dominance structuring” in your own words.
Is dominance structuring a positive or negative attribute of critical thinking? Explain.
Use examples if that is helpful to your explanation.
Cognitive Bias
Briefly examine what part you think mastery of facts and understanding of data have in avoiding cognitive bias in System-1 thinking.
If you include references to outside sources (beyond the textbook), make sure you cite them properly.
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 1 ½ -2 pages (not including prompts, title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
References page (as needed)

Textbook: Chapter 8, 9, 17 (Introduction); review Chapter 7
Lesson
Introduction
Remember – your actual journal entry should be somewhat brief; most of your time should be spent thinking about the questions asked and the issues raised. Your thoughts should then be distilled into a mini-argument that will respond affirmatively to the four tests for evaluating arguments: truthfulness of premises, logical strength, relevance, and non-circularity.
Instructions
For this journal assignment, briefly answer each of the following prompts:
Inference: The differing meanings of “valid inference” and “warranted inference” are closely related to the differing purposes of deductive and inductive arguments – the purpose of deductive being to prove; the purpose of inductive to make the conclusion most probable.
Look up the words “valid” and “warranted.” Each of these words, you will find, has what is known as a lexical definition – that is just the dictionary definition of the word. Words also have a certain connotations – meanings that go beyond their lexical definitions; associated ideas and concepts – think of terms such a “fur baby” as the name for a pet.
Briefly discuss how the lexical definitions and connotations of “valid” and “warranted” can help us understand the differing purposes of deductive and inductive arguments.
Fallacies: In Section 8.2, the text states that there are “fallacious argument templates” (Facione & Gittens, p. 167) and then gives a number of examples. The authors further state: “Analysis of the meanings of the terms used and the grammatical rules of the language reveal the source of error” (p.167).
Choose one of the fallacies in this section, such as Denying the Antecedent or False Classification and pair it with the valid argument template. For example, if you choose Denying the Antecedent, the valid argument template will be Denying the Consequent. False Classification would pair with one of the fallacies in Reasoning About Classes of Objects.
Explain, in your own words, how the fallacy is revealed through analysis of the valid argument template. Think of it this way – if you know how the heart works, you will know that certain malfunctions will prevent it from working.  For example, if you know that the coronary arteries supply the heart with blood, then you can reason that a blockage will stop that vital flow. So this journal prompt asks you to explain, in your own words, how one of the valid argument templates work – and how that exposes the fallacy connected with that type of argument.
Civic Responsibility: At the end of Chapter 9 there is a Bonus Exercise that asks you to research and analyze the 2009 debate over the healthcare public option. If you were actually to complete that exercise, it would take quite a bit of time and effort.
Do you think that completing such an exercise would be time well spent or time wasted? If well-spent, why? If time wasted, why?
Is there any issue on which you think a comparable amount of time and effort would be worthwhile?
As a critical thinker, do you believe that citizens have an obligation to be informed on topics of current interest? If yes, why, if no, why not?
If you include references to outside sources (beyond the textbook), make sure you cite them properly.
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 1 ½ -2 pages (not including prompts, title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
References page (as needed)

Textbook: Chapter 8, 9, 17 (Introduction)
Lesson
Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)
Find and post examples of deductive and inductive arguments. Do NOT use an argument example which clearly indicates it is an example of an inductive/deductive argument.
For each example, evaluate its logical strength, using the concepts and ideas presented in the textbook readings, the lesson, and any other source you find that helps you to evaluate the validity (deductive) or strength (inductive) of the argument. You can use examples from the text, or you can find examples elsewhere.
Editorials and opinion columns are a good source, as are letters to the editor. Blogs will also often be based on arguments.
Use mapping and evaluative techniques to make sure it is an argument.
Is it inductive or deductive? Explain why.
Does it pass the tests of validity and strength? Explain.
Minimum of 2 posts (1 initial & 1 follow-up)
Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside source)
APA format for in-text citations and list of references

Valid Argument StructuresDeductiveInductive
A valid structure is the way in which an argument is put together that assures it will pass the test of logical strength.