Political Speeches
Looking at Truman’s speech before Congress, it can be concluded that there are a number of argumentation fallacies pinpointed from the address. There is causal argumentation brought about by the aspect of begging the question. For instance, in the speech, he says that Greece has not been rich because it has no sufficient natural resources ( Truman, 1947 ). Taking a keen look at his conclusion, it is appropriate to aver that the President is looking for an avenue to raise concern on the issues affecting the Greeks.
There are aspects of hasty generalizations in which Truman is fast to give conclusions about his intended actions. There are no validations through conclusive evidence of the claims. It entails coming to a conclusion about an issue without giving clear sufficient evidence. It does not matter whether the evidence is sufficient or insufficient, what is prominent is the existence of factual backing. A discussion can be treated to have a hasty conclusion if one of the discussants concludes that there is no answer to a given situation ( Hansen, 2015). The case of hasty generalization is pointed out in the speech given by the former American President when he says that the government has considered the input which would be given by the United Nations and how it is likely to assist in the situation. However, the United Nations according to the President is not likely to help much as the issue should be treated with the urgency it deserves. Looking at his conclusion, it is valid to state that the president is not ready to exploit fully through thorough analysis the recommendations and options given to him as alternatives.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The narrative fallacies tend to focus on how our inadequate analysis through linkage of facts has contributed to the inability to verify their sequence flow and interrelations. This again can be seen in the doctrine speech in that the President is not in a position to give a sequence of events amicably and convincingly on how Greece found itself in the state discussed.
There are roles played by arguments in the process of critical thinking. First, arguments stimulate open-mindedness that allows one to exhibit the features of critical thinking. Critical thinking will enable one to know how to create good judgment out of a particular argument. It should be learned that critical thinking as a skill is not working in isolation but rather in connection to a given area of study (McPeck, 2016). It is within the good standing to affirm that psychology with sub-discussion of arguments is likely to arouse the fact that critical thinking is necessary connected to arguments. Critical thinking is impossible to occur when there is no aspect of argument and reasoning.
Affirmative Action
Looking at the clip from the Affirmative Action Debate, there are various arguments which can be spotted. However, the most striking argument in the entire discussion is on the linkage of historical injustices remitted on the African Americans on the opportunities in the learning space ( Critical Thinks - Back Stage, 2016 ). In the argument, David is stating that the diversity required in the University should be traced back to the time of slavery where African Americans were the victims of hostility. Looking at this, David is not in a good position to explain amicably the effect of slavery on the university diversity. Cate is within the point when she points out that the current situation should not be dictated by the past incidences. Out of all these, Brit has the most valid point in her argument. She states that nobody is in control of their diversity and thus no one is in control of the race they find themselves in. Hence, in ensuring education and enrolment, people should be judged through their personal contents such as talents and capabilities.
As stated before, Brit made the most sounding argument as pertains to the discussion on the diversity in education facilities. International learning and other diversities seem to shift from value addition though input to all persuasive nature of the market. This is the reason behind supporting the argument given by Brit. Harvard University (2009) affirms that students should be involved in various school undertakings not based on their nature but on the content of their outputs such as talents .
Again there is a need to create awareness among the students in learning the existing interrelationships between the students and the various members of the society through understanding the injustices incurred by various diversities (O'Grady, 2014). Most of the students in the argument were not putting this into consideration instead, they based most of the arguments on the historical injustices remitted on some race and linked it to what the universities are undergoing currently.
References
Critical Thinks - Back Stage. (2016, January 28). Affirmative Action Debate - ABRIDGED - Harvard's Michael Sandel JUSTICE - What's the right thing [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B17OINF_SI
Hansen, H. (2015). Fallacies. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/
Harvard University. (2009, September 4). Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 09: "ARGUING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUhReMT5uqA
McPeck, J. E. (2016). Critical thinking and education . Routledge.
O'Grady, C. R. (2014). Integrating service learning and multicultural education: An overview. In Integrating service learning and multicultural education in colleges and universities (pp. 17-36). Routledge.
Truman, H. S. (1947, March 12), Recommendation for assistance to Greece and Turkey, document no. 171 [Transcript of Presidential address to Senate]. Retrieved from https://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/doctrine/large/documents/pdfs/5-9.pdf
