Examining the Validity of Questionable Claims to Truth and Pseudo-Scientific Arguments

Assignment:

Pseudo-Science Analysis/Evaluation Outline.................................................10%

Pseudo-Science Analysis/Evaluation Paper....................................................10%

Purpose: This assignment builds on the previous assignment (Analyzing Lines of Argument in a Source) by adding an additional analytical elements or tools of Argument Analysis and evaluating in greater detail a source's logic and evidence or "claim to truth".  The central purposes of this assignment are to:

-- Practice using the Argument Analysis method to analyze (break apart) an argument.

-- Separate rhetoric (ethos, pathos, appeals to values) from logic and evidence (logos).

-- Practice using and show your understanding of the Lines of Argument and Logical Fallacy and "Baloney Detection" terms and concepts.

-- Evaluate the source's validity.

-- Allow you to examine how logic and evidence are abused to support faulty or invalid claims; to examine how pseudo-scientific arguments appear to support valid claims through faulty or non-existent evidence and faulty logic or "logical fallacies".

Due Dates: TBA or see schedule

Guidelines:

Following the in class example of analyzing and evaluating the Fox Network's Conspiracy Theory: Did We Really Land on the Moon? video:

Analyze how the source uses rhetoric (ethos, pathos and appeals to values) to persuade its audience, and analyze/evaluate the source's use of logos (logic and evidence) by applying Sagan's "Baloney Detection" concepts and the logical fallacy terms and concepts from Lundsford and Sagan.  To do so you will need to:

1) Choose a video, web-site or book that argues for the existence of something like aliens, big-foot, spontaneous human combustion, psychics, fairies, ghosts, Noah's Ark and so on. (Howard Hughes Video, located on 5th Street, downtown (across from The Moscow Food Co-op), has a special section devoted to this stuff, but you should have no trouble locating suitable sources elsewhere as well). Note: the source must make a factual claim, a "claim to objective, factual truth”.

2) Critically view the source and take notes. You will need to refer to direct quotes and specific names, so you may need to watch or study the source more than once.

3) Outline the argument. This should help you organize and develop the analysis below and reveal which elements of the source's argument are and are not well supported..

4) Analyze the source's Lines of Argument: how the source persuades its audience by establishing it credibility and authority (ethos), making emotional appeals (pathos), and appealing to common values.

5) Analyze in detail the source's use of logic and evidence (logos). Essentially, turn the outline, above, into the body of your essay,  and evaluate the validity of each specific supporting reason by quoting and citing  terms and concepts from Sagan and the online logical fallacy resources etc. The central purpose of this essay is to prove the source uses bad science (pseudoscience), invalid or non-existent evidence or specific logical fallacies to advance an invalid claim. This section should, therefore, comprise the bulk of your essay.

6) Cite your source and use specific quotes from the source and Sagan; use MLA format.