Axia College MaterialAppendix ECritical Analysis FormsFill out one form for each source.
Source 1 Hobbs, Thomas R. “ Physicians Should Treat Alcoholism as a Disease.” Current Controversies: Alcoholism. Ed.
James D. Torr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2000. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center.
Gale. Apollo Library. 20 Dec.
2009
ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/ovrc/infomark. do&contentSet= GSRC&type= retrieve&tabID= T010&prodId= OVRC&docId= EJ3010208213&source= gale&srcprod= OVRC&userGroupName= apollo&version= 1. 0>.| | 1| Identify the principal issue presented by the source.
| Is alcoholism a disease or a personal conduct problem.| 2| Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| I didn??™t find this article to be biased because it is made up of facts.
| 3| Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| The author of the article explained in detail and stayed on topic. I don??™t find this to be vague or ambiguous.| 4| Do you find the source credible Explain your reasoning.
| I found this to be credible because the article was published in the Physicians News Journal. The author also references reliable sources such as American Psychiatric Association??™s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.| 5| Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| Did not find any rhetorical devices used.
No rhetorical definitions or any other type of slanting device to explain his argument. | 6| Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
| Fallacies are not used by the author to downsize his claims or arguments.| 7| State one argument made by the author.| Alcoholism should not be judged as a problem of willpower, misconduct, or any other unscientific diagnosis. | 8| Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.| Alcoholism should not be judged as a problem of willpower, misconduct, or any other unscientific diagnosis| 9| Is the author??™s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak Explain how you determined this.
| His argument is valid and sound. The author has supported his argument by compiled information and facts from credible sources that support his argument.| 10| Does the author use moral reasoning If not, explain how you determined this.| The argument does not express value reasoning, so no the author did not use moral reasoning.| Source 2 Title and Citation: McGrath, Matt. “ Marijuana Should Be Legalized.” Current Controversies: Illegal Drugs.
Ed. Charles P. Cozic. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1998. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Apollo Library.
20 Dec. 2009
com/ovrc/infomark. do&contentSet= GSRC&type= retrieve&tabID= T010&prodId= OVRC&docId= EJ3010051223&source= gale&srcprod= OVRC&userGroupName= apollo&version= 1. 0>.| | 1| Identify the principal issue presented by the source.| The principal is how are nation would profit from the legalization of marijuana.| 2| Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| I think with a title like Marijuana Should Be Legalized the author would have to be somewhat biased.
| 3| Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| All though hemp was briefly legalized, I found to be vague because no date was given. The prohibition of this drug is quite expensive to maintain, is vague because it doesn??™t give the cost.
Courtrooms are backed up for months, doesn??™t say exactly how many months. Those are just a few there were a few others that didn??™t give cost or a time period.| 4| Do you find the source credible Explain your reasoning.| The author is an engineer not an expert and some of the information is vague, so I find this a less credible source.| 5| Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| Smoking the plant would turn people into axe wielding murders, is a rhetorical explanation. Gets high, is a rhetorical definition for smoking marijuana.
| 6| Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| I couldn??™t see where the author used any fallacies that weakened his argument. If anything I could see wishful thinking.| 7| State one argument made by the author.| No additives would be needed, since smokers really don??™t need any. | 8| Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
| Smokers don??™t need any additives is the premise and the conclusion is it doesn??™t need any additives.| 9| Is the author??™s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak Explain how you determined this.| The premise being true makes the conclusion true, so I would say the authors argument is valid.| 10| Does the author use moral reasoning If not, explain how you determined this.| I think the moral reasoning the author is using is moral relativism. The idea that what is right and wrong depends on and is determined by one??™s group or culture.| Source 3 Title and Citation:| | 1| Identify the principal issue presented by the source.
| | 2| Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| | 3| Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
| | 4| Do you find the source credible Explain your reasoning.| | 5| Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| | 6| Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| | 7| State one argument made by the author.| | 8| Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
| | 9| Is the author??™s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak Explain how you determined this.| | 10| Does the author use moral reasoning If not, explain how you determined this.| | Source 4 Title and Citation:| | 1| Identify the principal issue presented by the source.| | 2| Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| | 3| Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous.
If none exist, explain how you determined this.| | 4| Do you find the source credible Explain your reasoning.| | 5| Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author.
If none exist, explain how you determined this.| | 6| Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.| | 7| State one argument made by the author.
| | 8| Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.| | 9| Is the author??™s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak Explain how you determined this.| | 10| Does the author use moral reasoning If not, explain how you determined this.| |
