Santa Monica Fallacies Determination Notes Assignment

October 5, 2022

Santa Monica Fallacies Determination Notes Assignment

Order ID:89JHGSJE83839

Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago

Pages:5-10

Instructions:

Santa Monica Fallacies Determination Notes Assignment

I’m working on a communications multi-part question and need a sample draft to help me learn.

Use the list of fallacies to determine what type of fallacy is use on the numbered statements below.

FALLACIES

Proposing a false dilemma – either/or

Criticizing the source rather than the issue – attacking the person

Relying on false experts

Band wagon – “everybody does it so it’s okay to do it”

Arguing that “that’s the way it has always been done”

Using threats

Hasty generalization – jumping to conclusion without enough evidence

Arguing a false cause

Arguing in circles

STATEMENTS

The new restrictions on getting a driver’s license are so unfair. What do a bunch of middle-aged guys in the legislature know about being a teenager?

Thanks to our prayers, terrorists can no longer cause an attack.

I believe in God because I just don’t think a supreme being would put the idea of God in our minds if it weren’t true.

We either vote on new immigration laws this year or the next.

I’ve heard that football players use steroids. So now that my brother is playing football, he’ll probably start using steroids too.

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Methodology

58-53 points

Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.

83-76 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.

52-49 points

Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.

75-1 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.

48-1 points

There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met