The so-called War on Drugs has inspired many an entertaining public service announcement (PSA) over the last few decades. Some are more over-the-top than the others. Looking back at some of the most outlandish, it is easy to see a series of errors in reasoning that are present in these PSAs. Using what you have learned this week about fallacies (e.g. ad hominem, slippery slope) and argument layouts (claim, data, warrant), please watch the following anti-marijuana video from last year in Michigan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_juAYu3mEw (Links to an external site.)
There are a myriad of problematic components to this short PSA. Your job is to identify the structure of the argument being put forth and the fallacies in reasoning being used in this argument.
In approximately 400-500 words (1 single spaced page), please accomplish the following tasks:
1. Identify the layout of the argument being put forth by the ad campaign. This would include the claim, data, and warrant (see Borchers & Hundley pp. 100-108).
2. Identify the modes of evidence being used to support the claim, data, and warrant (look at things like what the actors are saying, what they are wearing, how they look, what they are doing, etc.)
3. Identify two rhetorical fallacies within the video. Please name the fallacy, define the fallacy, give a direct example of where you see it in the video, and explain why this reasoning is fallacious.
4. Include a word count at the end of your post (we will double check this against microsoft word).
——————————————————————
You will be graded according to the following criteria:
Format:
5 points: Your post meets the required 400-500 word length and has a word count posted at the end of the post;
5 points: Your post uses proper grammar, spelling, and paragraph breaks
Identification of Argument Structure:
15 points: You correctly identify and list the argument layout in the video, specifically listing the claim, data, and warrant
5 points: You identify specific moments within the video of where you find these premises, either through direct quotes from the actors or through film components such as lighting, costume, sound, etc.
Identification of Fallacies:
5 points: You correctly identify 1 fallacy, name it, define it, provide evidence of where you see it in the video.
5 points: You correctly identify a second fallacy, name it, define it, provide evidence of where you see it in the video.
5 points: You offer a counter-argument to the first fallacy (explaining why it is a weak argument and should be dismissed).
5 points: You offer a counter-argument to the second fallacy (explaining why it is a weak argument and should be dismissed).
Total points: 50
—————————————————————————————————————————–
Good luck!
0 comments