Evaluating Truth and Validity Exercise Essay

workweek three assignment was to evaluate competitions from scenarios in the applications list 12.2 (a.-y.) at the terminate of Ch. 12 in The Art of Thinking employ the 4-stepm process piece of music explaining the assessment and adding an alternative argumentation where need be. I ordain make with the premise that Power must be sin beca wont it can bumble great deal which is in exercise j. standard ace, I would verify that the argument was stated clear and complete for any hidden premises. The argument did non hold the water once checked for errors affecting the integrity although it seemed to curb past the first obstacle. Due to the many previous individuals throughout news report who had provide and were never corrupted proves that the argued statement ability corrupts all people is not true. I believe that power may be considered unrighteous if put into the wrong hands would be a more logical argument.The argument failed on several objectives once the reasonin gs that relate conclusions to premises determined whether the conclusion is illegitimate or legitimate and rigourousness errors ar considered during the evaluation process in step three. Questions such as How corrupt do an individual be in possession of to become before considered evil? need to be answered when revising the statement. Individuals who have d unmatched corrupt things notwithstanding does not label them as evil. One may ask what would be considered evil or what would be acceptable or unacceptable precisely yet still not categorized as evil? So with picking that statement apart and showing all the flaws it is only dress hat to move on to a divergent argument and throw this one out. Evil is defined assome type of supernatural metier or profound immorality and powers used for evil purposes will have evil results. So that tells you that if power is in the right hands on that point will be good results.Second Argument- NExercise n will be the last argument which s tates, nuclear power is a threat to creative activity recreation. Nuclear power is generated by nuclear dexterity stations which makes the statement not true. The hidden premise process and sustain that the statement was complete and clear was the first step done. Checking for errors affecting the truth was the following step. Just reading the statement as is, Nuclear power is a threat to world peace, is written infatuatedly. It should read Nuclear power is a threat to world peace if used as a subdivision.Fossil efficacy is a positive way to use nuclear energy which makes the original statement false. Next we will watch the reasoning that link conclusions to premises and check for validity errors. Nuclear power is a threat to world peace is the premise and I sustain that the statement was false. Once I inserted if used as a weapon the statement is now more defendable. So rewriting the statement using if used as a weapon has changed everything and has made it a alteration statement.Most nuclear energy is used to elicit clean energy and is not a threat to world peace unless it is used to produce weapons. The statement Nuclear power is a threat to world peace had to be rewritten to state Nuclear power is a threat to world peace if used as a weapon. Alternative energy sources ar generated by most nuclear energy stations and are no threat to the world peace.Third Argument- RIf the tender guarantor clay is further weakened, the elderly will have to tutelage poverty is my next argument which is exercise r in the evaluating for truth and validity. So consequently the elderly would not have to fear poverty if the Social Security system is not weakened. The statement passed once it was checked to be trustworthy if it was a clear and complete statement and forhidden premises so I moved on to checking for errors affecting the truth which was the next step. In this process I found the statement to be untrue collectible to not all elderly individuals rel y on Social Security. in that respect are several reasons one may be poverty level, one is making poor financial decisions which is also considered as mismanaging funds. This makes the statement false and untrue. If the statement read The elder who depends on Social Security will have to fear poverty if the system is further weakened, it would be more defensible.So therefore, those same elderly individuals would not have to fear poverty if the Social Security system is not further weakened. The net step can be derived from the premise to determine if there is a legitimate assumption and to check the argument for validity errors. The revised final statement is more defensible with the assumption that the elderly who depends on Social Security will be faced with poverty if the program is weakened. Step four process states that its best to embrace a different argument and abandon the old one if too many flaws are found in the one being evaluated which was done in each scenario to co mplete the process.ReferencesRuggiero, V.R. (2012). The art of thinking. A guide to critical and creative purview(10th ed.). Pearson Education