“Modern medicine affords patients a level of care unparalleled by anything this world has ever seen. International epidemics and chronic disease are being fought and resolved with elegantly engineered pharmaceuticals. Artificial prostheses are now more efficient than their natural analogs and their surgical implantation has become safe and routine. Computer-controlled robotics have made their way into the operating room, and French surgeons in Paris can perform procedures requiring minute detail on an American patients in New York with the aid of satellites. All of these impossible, science fiction-esque developments in medicine are actively being expanded and implemented into treatment on a daily basis. Yet millions of Americans today still struggle with the idea of healthcare in terms of the big picture.”
I was a bit carried away with this one. While the “facts” preceding the ultimate statement are related to medicine, they are not really related to the administration of the healthcare industry. I will most likely just drop this entire passage instead of trying to fix it.
“With the failed government subsidies haunting in the past, new looks at how the government’s partial control of the healthcare industry will pan out suggest an uncertain future. Social Security is a powerful example illustrating how similar plans can backfire when controlled by federal policy makers.”
Although the point made in this excerpt is valid, the words “failed” and “haunting” describing previous government subsidies reflect a bias in language. This can be easily edited by either completely removing these adjectives or replacing them with less powerful words.
Th only free-standing text my poster is going to feature is the “Preventative Medicine” clause found in HR3590, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This will be located in the upper center of the poster. For each segment, I will create a visual representation of preventative medicine before the current legislation, one of the state of preventative medicine currently, and a proposed depiction of what preventative medicine will be like in the immediate the future following the full implementation of the preventative medicine clause in HR3590. Features will include tables and graphs of preventable disease incidence, CDC pamphlets, and other similar data.
* I completely forgot about this assignment until I glanced at my day-planner just now, I apologize
-Circular Reasoning: I could correct this by combining these sentences or even getting rid of one of them so I would no longer be repeating myself.
“There have been recent studies done using the caffeine in coffee as a possible treatment for the symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease, but how effective is this treatment in comparison to others that are more commonly used?
The question that I am trying to answer through my research is how do the results of caffeine from coffee as a treatment to Alzheimer’s disease compare to the results of cholinesterase inhibitors, a more commonly accepted treatment for the disease, as a treatment seeing that coffee is so easily accessible to much of the world.”
-bandwagon appeal: Though this is a true statement, it would be more powerful if I gave an actual statistic to show that many people consume coffee
“Everyday billions of people are consuming this product and without knowing it, could be aiding their own health and well-being.”
I envision my poster being somewhat split up like my research paper. One section will be an introduction with a little bit of background information on coffee and Alzheimer’s. The second section will be on the actual research I had done which will include graphs and pictures. This section will be the middle section and will be split into two sections itself. The first section will be on the coffee treatment and the other will be on the cholinesterase inhibitor treatment. The third section will display my results and conclusion. Throughout all of these sections I am keeping in mind that I am only limited to 300 words so much of the poster will be filled with pictures and graphs and other data. I plan to make my poster very eye catching using lots of color and probably painting the board’s different sections to make it more interesting.
Fallacy # 1
“There are numerous examples of botched painting restorations that have occurred across millennia, though only in about the last century, with the advent of easier means of technological communication, has the debate begun to pick up.”
This is an example of biased language, as I used the unnecessarily harsh word “botched” to describe some painting restorations. I can correct this by using a much blander choice of words, such as:
“There are numerous examples of painting restorations that have been widely criticized as poorly executed, though only in about the last century, with the advent of easier means of technological communication, has the debate begun to pick up.”
Fallacy # 2
“It is reasonable to believe that most anyone would want to help preserve such an integral aspect of humanity’s culture; however, if this preservation is being done in a manner that detracts from the artist’s original perception of the piece, then all that meaning and worth is lost.”
This is an example of an either/or fallacy. Not all meaning and worth of a painting would be lost if its preservation were being performed in an inappropriate manner. By adding in “could” to the sentence, it displays the potential gravity of the situation, while refraining from making it a clear cut “either/or” position.
“… however, if this preservation is being done in a manner that detracts from the artist’s original perception of the piece, then that aspect of the painting’s worth could be lost in the process.”
For my poster, I intend to display pictures of the Sistine Chapel before its restoration and afterward. Accompanying that, I’m going to make short descriptions of the two sides of the debate over painting restoration and how the Sistine Chapel is applied to that (on two panels of the poster) as well as my conclusion concerning this debate (on the third panel).
HASTY GENERALIZATION: because there is no real evidence I have stated that shows that the rate of movies with a relationship theme is actually growing. I would fix this by not actually stating this as a fact but explaining how a lot of movies do have a common theme of relationships.
“Hollywood seems to believe this, the amount of relationship movies out there today has been overwhelming and continues to grow and grow.”
HASTY GENERALIZATION: This is a conclusion I made based on the evidence, and how we react to being cheated on. It says that where cheating is not a big deal the sexuality of females isn’t always focused on completely. Therefor i concluded that the reason we are more upset due to cheating has to do with a focus in our culture on female sexuality. However, this is no where stated. I will fix this by not mentioning that our culture is necessarily focused on the sexuality of females.
“Also culture can affect how one reacts to the thought of a cheater in a relationship. The culture we live in is more focused on the female sexuality than most cultures are.”
I plan on dividing my poster into three panels one:the topic and the questions I’m asking, two: the “they say”, and three: what I think I will find. In the questions section I will state my question and the different aspects that go into the questions I’m talking about and the break down. In the “they say” I will use it as an opinion based section and show the stereotypes that are out there about my topic. In the third section I will show some of the charts I have already found and some of the evidence that either goes with or against the stereo-types.
“It is known that fraternities have a stereotypically bad reputation.” Pg. 1
This is a bandwagon appeal from the list of common logical fallacies. This is because I am assuming that everybody knows that fraternities have a bad reputation. It shows that I think that everybody knows about this stereotype. I can correct this by rephrasing my statement to show that the stereotype is not a shared belief amongst everybody, and clarify that it is only a portion of people who believe this.
“O’Donnell declares that binge drinking is present within fraternities and probably will remain present, although some switch liquor for beer instead, lessening the proof, and therefore the chance of death or blackouts.”
This statement by O’Donnell is a hasty generalization. The conclusion is based off of insufficient data, and no specific statistics. The author thinks that because a particular fraternity does an action, a result that is in favor of his point of view is the result. In my paper, what I can do is point this out, thus adding more of my personal anecdote to the argument.
On my poster, I plan on incorporating numerous statistics and tables. Words will be minimally used, and instead substituted with graphs and other figures. I will use the two side panels to focus on 4 different arguments included in my paper (2 for each panel), and the middle panel focusing on the aspects of alcohol vs. development, which I think is the biggest, and best argument in my paper. This will highlight my research topic. I went to the poster meeting, so this helped formulate my tactics through poster content, as well as overall design to appeal to my audience.
On my poster, I will split it up into three sections, the way my paper is. The economic section will likely have a graph or chart of the economic progression of both the south as a whole and south carolina. The impact of nullification on the economy will be a seperate chart. On the historical and cultural part of the poster, different images of what makes South Carolina different from the North and how that was portrayed will be present, as well as images of John C. Calhoun and texts of his speeches. On the political and government side of the poster there may be some images of debate in the Senate over enforcement of tariffs, but this is where most of the words that I will be using will go.
1) “The continued use of using bullet points will continue the slide of uninformative presentations.” The first problem with this sentence is the double “use.” However, the fallacy would be a hasty generalization. The way it is used in the paper could sort of back up this claim, but I have no real evidence that says this will happen. It is just me inferring it by making connections between two pieces of evidence. To fix this I can either eliminate the sentence completely, or simply change the wording. By saying that this might happen, it would make it more of the connection that I was going for rather then it is definitely going to happen.
2) “However from personal experience, it seems that the two most common methods are visual representation of the information (i.e. chalk board, overhead, or PowerPoint) and the traditional lecture.” While the wording of it doesn’t portray the fallacy, the meaning behind the sentence is the either/or fallacy. I am assuming that these are the only ways of learning, when in fact, there are many more out there I just have not been exposed to them. To fix this I will continue to do research to find other learning methods. If I cannot find any then I will just change the wording to incorporate that there are many types of learning.
For my poster, I will break down my paper into three parts, and present each part on a different section of the poster. On one section I will present the overall problem, thesis, and the studies on PowerPoint’s effectiveness I presented at the beginning of the paper. I will present the results of the studies in some form of graph. I presume that of the three sections this will have the most words, because I will use them to help the audience understand the overall concept of my paper. The second section I will present the problems with PowerPoint and what causes it’s ineffectiveness. This should be easy to present through visuals. In the final section, I think it would be cool to present some of the “solutions” I came up with. Again, this should be easy to present visually. This way the audience can see what the “problems” look like, and then what a better presentation and how to delivery it should look like.
“The secession of South Carolina yielded the immediate secession of many other southern states.” This is a bandwangon appeal fallacy. I could correct this mistake by providing a source or more evidence to show that it is an accepted belief in the academic community.
“The status of South Carolina’s farming class and merchants in urban areas was deteriorating and they certainly knew the position that Northern policies were putting them in with tariffs and abolition of slavery, which is a big part of their economic success.” I do the same thing again here with bandwagon appeal. I made a counter statement to what the author had stated, but didnt back it up.
Fallacy 1: “Since eighty eight percent of graduates are from private colleges, this shows that there might be a preference to private colleges”
Type of Fallacy: Hasty Generalization. I’m stating the reason for a high amount of people enrolled in privates colleges is because people prefer them more. The high percentage can also be because there are not many public colleges.
Correction for fallacy: State that there is a high percentage of people enrolled in private colleges, but don’t make an unsupported claim at the end.
Fallacy 2: “Government’s involvement in the creation of these institutes [Indian Institute of Technology] will help boost the number of graduates”
Type of Fallacy: Hasty Generalization. I’m saying that the increase in the colleges will increase the number of graduates, which might not necessarily be true.
Correction of Fallacy: Add information of why there will be a boost on the number of graduates. For example, show statistics on how many people apply to the IIT. If there is a lot of competition, then it shows that increase in the number of IIT’s will help boost the number of high skilled graduates.
The poster will be divided into three sections. The first section will be about education and the problems that they have, such as lack of professors and lab equipment. The second section will be about the IT industry and how the improvement of education can help this industry prosper. The third section will be about what the government can do to fix the problems in the education system and help keep the software industry going.
“Overconsumption of calories in the United States is usually meat and animal bi-products, which contain cholesterol and saturated fatty acids. The rate that the United States consumes meat is extremely excessive, given meat is not crucial to having a balanced diet.”
Not only did I not have hard evidence to prove my statement, but I also use the word “usually” which is not persuasive or successful in proving my argument. The common logical fallacy that I used was False Cause. I implied that obesity was caused largely by the consumption of meat and animal byproducts. I need to use statistics to strengthen my argument and correctly relate the consumption of meat for a percentage of overconsumption of daily caloric intake.
“This would increase yields allowing farmers to sustain a food supply as well as grow their incomes.”
This was in relation to improving agricultural conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa. This conclusion does not logically follow because there are so many more variables that have not been accounted for, such as governments manipulating the incomes of farmers. I need to go in depth about how incomes will fall from an economic aspect. I need to specify how incomes could potentially grow without government intervention.
On the two wings, I am going to present my two conflicting arguments about the impact of the industrialization of meat on rural farmers in developing countries; one promoting and the other condemning. In the middle I will draw my own conclusion together based off of the two different arguments. I will draw diagrams and market graphs to illustrate the impacts in the short and long term.
1. Hasty Generalization; “Governments commonly dislike the idea of firearms in the hands of their citizenry.” While this might be true, I need some supporting evidence.
2. Circular reasoning. “An armed citizen can deal with a criminal from an equal or better position. It’s difficult to kill . . . an armed person.” This doesn’t actually make an argument, it just makes the same claim twice.
In the left panel, I’ll put basic gun crime information, blown up so it can be seen easily, and photographs of some of the important people involved in the push for handgun bans.
The right panel will contain the information about my case studies (Chicago and DC)
The center panel will contain data from the Lott & Mustard study, contrasted with the Sloan study.
“Though this article is looking only at classical music, the results support the conclusion that familiar music which promotes a positive mood, increases working memory.”
While the paragraph preceding this sentence provides ample evidence for the claim that certain aspects of classical music affect memory, it would probably be best if more evidence was presented as to the importance of the familiarity of the music as the key factor before expanding the results from classical familiar music, to all familiar music.
“Two key differences between Mammarella’s study and Jancke and Pascale’s is familiarity with music, and the ability to draw connections between the music and the information to be recalled.”
While it is true that these are both distinctive differences between the two studies, it is somewhat biased to label them as the “key differences” which may be arbitrarily equating more importance to the two things than the studies necessarily imply. It would be better to provide more of an explanation as to why these two differences are “key” in the context of the studies’ methods and results.
My information will be split up in terms of the sections of the board and organized logically in the same manner as the sections of my paper. I plan to start on the left with pictures and graphs labelled to represent the studies that provide the best evidence for my conclusion. In the center will be again graphs and images labelled and explained briefly to provide an overview of the mood-arousal theory which is central to my paper. In the middle section I will also explain the general premise of the paper, i.e. the question I am asking and the answer the paper presents, as well as any terms or underlying ideas central to the thesis of my paper. On the right side of the board will be images which represent the applications of the study, i.e. music as a tool in the classroom, workplace, etc. and also representations of the different ways in which music can effect one’s mind in different situations.
“Knapper concludes that clothing does not give any insight about a person, and that using clothing as a cue to personality may even cause the observer to make inaccurate judgments.”
This is a hasty generalization. Just because clothing does not give any insight about a person, it does not necessarily means that it’ll cause observers to make inaccurate judgments. Even though it sounds very logical and flows well, it is a hasty generalization. To fix this I can look more into the research and pull parts out of the research to support and serve as a pillar for this statement.
“The surprising factor in this study however is that people who were given more information about the candidates did not perform as well as expected, once again leading to the conclusion that when information is available and useful, appearance is still more heavily relied on and hinders the use of the information.”
Again this is a hasty generalization because just because the candidates did not perform as well as expected, it does not mean that appearance was the cause/reason behind it. Like above I will need to read deeper into this research and pull out parts that will help support my claim.
I will organize my poster in a way to indirectly show what my research is really about. I will divide each section up, one section being filled with mostly only text, one section with graphs and charts, and one section with only pictures. Additionally I will mount the texts over black construction paper, graphs and charts over blue construction paper, and pictures over yellow construction paper. What I’m trying to do here is to indirectly show case the essence of my research paper and let the observers themselves see how appearance of something can affect their judgments, like which section the look at first (for example text is usually boring and pictures are more interesting and yellow is usually noticed first before black). Of courses there will be a short title which I have yet to come up with, and ill try to include the most important parts of my research into the text section. There are also a lot of charts, pictures, and graphs I can use.
“Once an individual is on the list, they are then at the mercy of the system.”
This is biased language. The word “mercy” has an obvious negative connotation, and should not be used. I should use a phrase that implies that once someone is on the organ transplant list, there is nothing else that they can do.
“If buying and selling human organs were legal, information on the quality of organs would spread much more efficiently due to a large increase in buyers and sellers.”
This is a bit of a hasty generalization. While this statement seems logical, it would be favorable to include evidence to support it.
I envision dividing my research paper into three distinct sections in order to organize them on the poster. The sections will be my research question, the discussion of my research question, and my conclusion. The discussion will be in the middle of the poster, and it will be the focus of the poster. This section will be divided into two subsections: the efficiency of the market for human organs and the ethics of the market for human organs. I am considering attaching a whiteboard to my poster, so I can draw some visual (supply and demand model) while presenting.
“Christians Attempted Takeovers”
Fallacy: Biased Language
Correction: Change it to something non-biased like “Christian’s claims to America”
“These attempts show that it is not speculation that Christianity is taken over, but active conquering on their part to make this their country”
Fallacy Biased Language
Correction: First fix spelling errors “taken” should be “taking” then change sentence to be less biased like “These events show that Christianity has made an open claim to the country as their own country”
For my poster I will use each side to tell a different part of the history. The middle will illustrate the main argument that Christianity and American Politics are intertwined and Christianity is influencing it. I’ll do this my using pictures of political religious gathers i.e. presidents at mass, large Christian groups doing something with politics like protests, banners, pamphlets, etc. I’ll have a few words on the middle section to help the views get the point as well. On the sides I’ll present the two presidents that I’m looking at in my paper. The Left will show President JFK and his election. I’ll try to find some pictures of the protests against him and his religion, and also of him making his speech in Houston, Texas. I’ll see if I can find an image containing the actual speech and if not I’ll take key parts from his speech and put them in larger, but not too large, font on the poster. On the right side I’ll present the case of George W. Bush and his elections. I’ll provide pictures of the religious appealing events he held to gain votes i.e. Church talks, pamphlets, etc. I’ll also put a few quotes from Bush or from his staff on his side to show how he ran his politics. The header to the whole this will be “Faith and Poltics” with a jagged line through the “and” to show that they should be separate.
“The trouble with Paustenbach’s report is that it’s heavily biased. He was hired by the Corn Refiners Association to investigate the problem, but they have a lot of money depending on HFCS and they stand to lose a lot if it is tainted by mercury.”
Argument to the Person (Ad Hominem)
I state that his argument is biased because the Corn Refiners Association hired him to do the research. However, his research may still be valid. I need to make sure I clarify that this is not the only reason I disagree with his report. I need to make sure it’s clear that this is just one factor that makes it more questionable how in depth his research was. There were other problems with his argument and those are what really need to be emphasized.
“These four factories having been operating for as long as 43 to 51 years. Most factories that don’t convert to mercury-free technology have to close before they’ve been operating for 50 years. He concludes that they will be forced to either upgrade or shut down.”
In this statement, I’m summarizing an argument made by another author. I need to explain that, just because other factories have closed down, doesn’t necessarily mean that these will have to close as well.
For my poster, I will divide it into three main sections. The first will be a brief history of how corn has become a large part of the food industry. The second will address the problems of obesity and why it shouldn’t be as big a concern as my third section: mercury contamination. The majority of the board will focus on mercury, how it effects us, how it may be making it’s way into our food, and why I think more research needs to be done.
The most difficult thing about the poster will be keeping the words under 300. Because the research on mercury is so new, it’s difficult to find graphs and other images that I can use.
-They could broaden their horizons and realize how the world is much larger than their limited life experience has shown them.
In this sentence “they” refers to elementary school children. This is a hasty generalization, because I am making the assumption that children have no worldly experiences. However, many children, such as children whose families participate in the military, have lived in multiple countries around the world. I could specify the statement to talk about how the majority of American children do not travel abroad at a young age.
-For all the benefits of the internet, there are scholars who are extremely wary about the freedom that the internet hands a group of children who are anywhere between the ages of five and twelve.
This is a pretty blatant bandwagon appeal, combined with an appeal to authority. I speak of how people who have higher education are wary of giving the internet to younger children. This could cause some people to change their position in the argument even though it is not backed up by any evidence. I either need to delete the sentence or rewrite it completely, because it’s not supported by any data.
In regards to my poster, I think I’m going to divide the main section of the poster into four parts, each of which will correlate to the four topics in education that I cover within my paper. For each portion, I want to find a picture that correlates to the subject. For example, on the math section, I’m going to attempt to try and take a screen shot of an online math game. On the sides of the poster, I’m considering putting a list of positives and negatives to computer use. This may be difficult with the word limit, but I’ll do my best to be brief.
1. “the low-density type of development that has been expanding rapidly encourages forest fragmentation”-non sequitor. I should include evidence that supports this statement
2. “seasonal maintenance of common areas could reduce the transmittance of Lyme disease”- non sequitor. I need evidence t support this statement
Poster: There are a lot of graphs and maps available for my poster, and I would include pictures as well. I would heavily rely on visuals, since they are they easiest way to get my point across
Biased Language: “from eight-year old children reading the latest edition of “Flash Gordon” by the schoolyard, to forty-year old men watching the newest episode of “Star Trek” in their parent’s basement, science fiction appeals to a wide assortment of people.”
I can correct this fallacy by amending this sentence to talk more about generalizations of science fiction and not specifically the culture itself. “Forty-year old men” are not a necessary part of this paper.
Hasty Generalization: “Through mythology we learn as much about ourselves and the world around us as we do through science.”
I can correct this fallacy by finding a source that supports this conclusion. Or another option is omitting the sentence completely.
I envision my poster to look like an 8th grade science fair poster board, except way cooler. Haha, just kidding Professor Sample!
I imagine my poster to contain the most salient points of my paper. In specific, I plan on including the definition of science fiction, or at least what I have pieced together, and the name of the work that I have identified as the origin of science fiction. In addition I plan on including intriguing visuals such as colorful pictures of spaceships and book covers to grab the attention of those who are passing by. Perhaps I will also include one or two excellent quotes from scholarly sources that I have found throughout my research. In terms of design I am going to try to make it colorful and fun, yet still serious and scholarly; Word Art is a must have.
“This demonstrates that ID is clearly a religious movement.”
This is a hasty generalization. Where I placed this statement in my paper I had not yet provided sufficient evidence to argue that it is clearly a religious movement. I would change this to:
These statements suggest that the motives of the ID movement have a religious basis.
“When the Court held that evolution could be taught, conservative Christian groups entertained a new strategy, which was to push for the teaching of ‘creation science’ alongside evolution.”
This statement may be an example of false cause. There appears to be a link in time between the two events which could be interpreted as cause and effect, but might not necessarily be so.
It is interesting to note that when the Court held that evolution could be taught, conservative Christian groups entertained a new strategy, which was to push for the teaching of ‘creation science’ alongside evolution.
My poster will contain various categories. The title is “Intelligent Design’s Changing Faces.” Sections include: what ID is, religious movement, creationism, history of movement, attacking evolution, becoming a science, not being a science, the wedge document, the popularity of the movement, the future and the truth. There will be a timeline of the picturing the ID movement’s progression of terminology.