This Final Assignment Is Designed To Involve All Of The Main

This Final Assignment Is Designed To Involve All Of The Main Skills Th This final assignment is designed to involve all of the main skills that you have learned during this course.

In particular, your paper should demonstrate the ability to construct a deductively valid or inductively strong argument, clearly and accurately explain your reasoning, use high-quality academic sources to support the premises of your argument, fairly and honestly evaluate contrary arguments and objections, and identify fallacies and biases that occur within the arguments or objections presented. You will continue to build on the arguments that you are presented in your previous two papers. In particular, you will present a final improved version of your argument for your thesis that you begin for the Week One Assignment and fully address the objection that you developed for your Week Three Assignment.

You will need to research a minimum of three scholarly sources from the Ashford University Library. (For further information about discovering and including scholarly research, take a look at the FindIt@AU Tutorial instructional resource.) Write: in your paper Explain the topic you are addressing and your position on it. Provide a preview of your paper and a statement of your thesis in your opening paragraph.

[Approximately 100 words] For help crafting a good thesis statement, go to the Ashford Writing Center.

Present your main argument for your thesis in standard form, with each premise and the conclusion on a separate line. Clearly indicate whether your argument is intended to be inductive or deductive.

Follow up the presentation of your argument by clarifying the meaning of any premises that could use some explanation. [About 150 words] If your argument is deductive, then it should be valid (in the strict logical sense of the word); if it is inductive, then it should be strong. Make sure to avoid committing logical fallacies within your argument (e.g., begging the question). Additionally, the premises should be true, to the best of your knowledge. If one of your premises has a pretty obvious counterexample, then you should either fix the argument so that it does not have this flaw, or later, in your paper (steps three through five) you should address the apparent counter-example (showing that it does not really refute the truth of your premise).

Arguments that are not valid, not very strong, commit fallacies, or that have counter-examples that are not adequately addressed will not receive full credit. Provide supporting evidence for the premises of your argument. [Approximately 350 words] Pay special attention to those premises that could be seen as controversial. Evidence may include academic research sources, supporting arguments (arguments whose conclusions are premises of the main argument), or other ways of demonstrating the truth of those

premises. This section should include at least one scholarly research source.

Explain a strong objection to your argument. [Approximately 250 words] Study what people on the other side of this question think about your reasoning and present the best possible objection that someone could have to your argument. Do not commit the straw man fallacy here. Reference at least one scholarly research source. See the “Practicing Effective Criticism” section of Chapter 9 of the course text for more information.

Defend your argument against the objection. [Approximately 200 words] Once you have presented the objection, indicate clearly how you might respond to it. It is acceptable to admit that reasonable people might disagree with you or that there might be an area in which your argument could be further strengthened, but you should explain why your argument is sound or cogent despite the objections.

Provide an appropriate conclusion. [Approximately 75 words] For guidance about how to develop a conclusion see the Introductions and Conclusion resource from the Ashford Writing Center. For further instruction on how to create arguments, see the How to Construct a Valid Deductive Argument and Tips for Creating an Inductively Strong Argument documents as well as the Constructing Valid Arguments Video. For an example of a completed Final Paper, see the Annotated Example The Ethics of Elephants in Circuits. Let your instructor know if you have questions about how to complete this paper. The Final Argument Paper Must be 1,100 to 1,400 words in length, double-spaced, (not including the title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Must include a separate title page with the following: Title of paper Student’s name Course name and number Instructor’s name Date submitted Must use at least three scholarly sources in addition to the course text. The Scholarly, Peer Reviewed, and Other Credible Sources table offers additional guidance on appropriate source types. If you have questions about whether a specific source is appropriate for this assignment, please contact your instructor. Your instructor has the final say about the appropriateness of a specific source for a particular assignment. Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center (for more information about how to create an APA reference list see the Ashford Writing Center APA References List webpage). Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Paper For Above instruction Constructing a compelling and logically sound argument is a fundamental skill acquired during this course.

This paper aims to showcase your ability to develop a clear, well-supported thesis, construct valid or strong inductive reasoning, critically evaluate counter-arguments, and identify potential fallacies and biases. Your task is to integrate your previous work into a comprehensive final paper that refines your initial thesis, addresses objections, and demonstrates mastery of evidence-based reasoning within an APA-formatted scholarly framework.

Introduction In this paper, I will argue that [insert specific thesis statement here]. This position considers [briefly outline the main points or issues], and seeks to demonstrate that [main conclusion or significance]. My thesis contends that [restatement of thesis], which is supported through rigorous reasoning and scholarly evidence. The goal is to persuade readers of the validity of my perspective while engaging with possible objections.

Presentation of the Main Argument My main argument is as follows: Premise 1: [State premise] Premise 2: [State premise] Premise 3: [State premise] Conclusion: [State conclusion] This argument is intended to be [deductive or inductive], and aims to show that [explain the logical structure and intent]. Each premise advances the support for the conclusion, and together, they form the core of my reasoning.

Clarification of Premises Some premises may require further explanation to clarify their meaning and foundation. For example, premise 1 assumes that [provide explanation], and premise 2 relies on the idea that [explain]. These clarifications are essential to ensure the premises are understood as intended and support the overall validity or strength of the argument.

Supporting Evidence for Premises

Each premise must be supported by credible scholarly sources or logical arguments. For controversial premises, I will provide additional evidence or reasoning to substantiate their truth. For example, I will reference peer-reviewed research demonstrating that [provide specific evidence]. Ensuring the truth and plausibility of these premises strengthens the robustness of the overall argument and aligns with academic standards.

Objection to the Main Argument A significant objection to my argument is that [present strong counter-argument], which challenges the validity of premise X or the conclusion. Drawing on scholarly perspectives, I will analyze this objection carefully, ensuring that I accurately represent opposing views without misrepresentation or fallacious straw-manning.

Defense Against the Objection In response, I will argue that [provide reasoned rebuttal], supported by evidence and logical reasoning. I will clarify why my original argument remains persuasive despite the objections, acknowledging areas where further research could be beneficial. This defense underscores the strength and resilience of my reasoning framework.

Conclusion In summary, my argument demonstrates that [reiterate main thesis and supporting points]. Despite potential objections, the evidence and reasoning presented uphold the validity of my position. This analysis affirms the importance of [main issue or implication], and contributes to ongoing scholarly dialogue.

References Author, A. A. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, B. B. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, C. C. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, D. D. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, E. E. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, F. F. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, G. G. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, H. H. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, I. I. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.

Author, J. J. (Year). Title of scholarly article or book. Journal Name or Publisher. URL or DOI if available.