I'm attaching assignment
Ethics Schema Assignment Guideline Sheet Argument Schema Assignment #4 This assignment is optional! If you complete it, it will replace your lowest schema grade. Due Date: This first schema assignment is due by the end of the day, Monday, May 3rd. Submit the assignment by uploading your schema in a Word document in the assignment link. Please submit your assignment in a Word document, often other formats do not open. Word is available to you for free from PVCC. Instructions Pick one quote from the set of quotes at the end of this document and write a schema of the argument contained in the passage. Submit the assignment by uploading your schema in a Word document in the assignment link. What is a Schema? A schema is a particular way of presenting arguments so that the arguments can be more easily understood. This is done by breaking an argument down into its premises and conclusion. The conclusion of an argument is the thing argued for in the passage, or the point that the writer of the passage is trying to convey. The premises are the reasons given in support of the conclusion; any statement in the passage that supports the believability of the conclusion is a premise. Breaking an argument down into its premises and conclusion involves stating the distinct premises of an argument separately, followed by the conclusion, as in the following schema. P1. Socrates is a man. P2. All men are mortal. C Socrates is mortal. Here “P1” and “P2” stand for ‘premise one’ and ‘premise two,’ while the “C” stands for the conclusion. In writing a schema, it is customary to use these abbreviations so that the role of the various statements can be more easily understood. In completing your assignment of schematizing of a passage below, you should use this format as well. As another example, consider the passage from John Stuart Mill, “But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.” In trying to clearly convey the argument in any passage, you have to first understand the argument. One way to start is to ask yourself what is the main point that the writer is trying to convey? Using this strategy then, the first thing to do is to find the conclusion. What is Mill arguing for here? Roughly, he is arguing that restricting the freedom of expression is a bad thing. Once you have the conclusion, go through the passage and find the individual reasons given in support of the conclusion, writing them down as premises in the above described format. In stating the premises and conclusion, what’s most important is that your schema captures the meaning of the premises and conclusion. You should try to re-phrase the premises and conclusion of the argument clearly and in your own words. If the wording of the passage cannot be stated any more simply and clearly, where its meaning is very straightforward, you can use the same wording of the passage. But this is the exception and most of the time, it’s better to rephrase the sentences in your own words, as philosophers sometimes use wordy and redundant phrasing. Stating the premises in your own words will also allow you to more clearly state the meaning of the premises, and accurately capturing the meaning is what is most important. Think of the assignment as breaking-down or distilling the meaning of the argument down to its logical parts; your schema should state only the parts that play a role in the argument. A good schema does not merely repeat everything written in the passage. Rather, a good schema focuses on the roles particular sentences play in supporting the conclusion. The goal of the schema is to state the argument embedded in the passage more clearly than the passage itself does. So when schematizing the argument, you are not transcribing, but rather focusing on the meaning of argument exclusively and clarifying that argument by stripping away fluff and stating only the premises and conclusion. Focusing always on the meaning and the role of different parts of the passage, you may realize that the writer has said the same thing three different ways. If the passage contains several sentences that function as premises, but they all have the same meaning, then in your schema you only have to state those different sentences as one premise. If the passage contains a separate point in support of the conclusion, that would be your second premise. So each premise should only make one point; read the premises in your schema to make sure that are not making more than one point. And if the passage makes that point several different ways, then you only need to state that point’s meaning once as a premise. This listing of premises goes on until all the points in support of the conclusion are listed. How do you know what is the conclusion? Ask yourself, ‘what is the point of the passage?’ What is the writer trying to convince us of? The main point argued for in the passage is the conclusion of the argument. If your conclusion is also stated as a premise in your schema, then you have probably made a mistake. In good arguments, the premises should not restate or assume the truth of the conclusion. (To do so is to commit a fallacy called Begging the Question) Except in cases where the writer does in fact commit this fallacy, your schema is probably flawed if your have statements with the same meaning in both the premise and conclusion. It is important to notice that the premises, and sometimes the conclusion of an argument, are not always explicitly stated. The conclusion can be implied, or premises hidden as unstated assumptions. Sometimes arguments rely on assumptions that are not explicitly stated in the passage. The unstated assumptions function as hidden premises that support the conclusion. If the explicitly stated premises by themselves also imply the truth of some other unstated view, then that unstated view is a hidden assumption that you should state as a premise in your schema. In other words, if the conclusion requires more than just the explicitly stated premises to be true, then it may be helpful to think about what else would have to be true for the premises to lead to the conclusion. Assumptions are not always obvious, and it is not necessary to list everything that would have to be true for the premises to support the conclusion. There are many things we take for granted, or that are reasonable to assume in most arguments, assumptions of this nature go without saying. If you think the argument relies on an assumption that is perfectly reasonable and goes without saying, you do not need to state it. But sometimes the premises of an argument imply the truth of some other proposition that may be questionable, or that, whether reasonable or not, plays a significant role in the argument. These are the kind of assumptions that function as hidden premises and that you should state as premises in your schema. So, back to Mill’s quote. We know the conclusion already, so all we need to do is to state the reasons Mill gives in support of that conclusion. P1. The collision of truth with error produces a livelier impression of the truth, by shedding light on why a belief is true. P2. If the censored opinion is correct, then those who disagree with it lose the opportunity to replace their false belief with the true one as they are never exposed to the true, but censored, belief. P3. If the censored opinion is incorrect, then those that disagree with it lose the clearer understanding of their belief which results from understanding why their belief is true. P4. If an opinion is censored, then those that disagree with the censored view are done a greater disservice than those that agree with it. P5. As long as an opinion is repressed, then these benefits are not gained. C. Freedom of opinion and expression should not be restricted. Good schemas require careful thought about the meaning of the passage and you may want to add some commentary to explain points in your schema. I welcome any commentary, but you can also let the schema speak for itself. Is there only one right way to schematize a passage? Sometimes there is not; because there may be reasonable disagreements about the meaning and role of parts of the passage. With that said however, you do not have free reign to interpret a passage anyway you want and expect to receive a good grade. There is a meaning to the passage, some point the writer of that passage was trying to make and a way he or she argues for it. A good schema is one that clarifies the writer’s meaning by clarifying his or her argument. The passages below are given with no context, and this can make the author’s argument more difficult to understand. It may help you get a better sense of the meaning of the passage if you go to the page in the book cited after the quotation and familiarize yourself with the context of the quotation. Also, look up any unclear terms used in the passage so that you are sure to accurately render their meaning in your schema. Five Keys to Writing a Good Schema Grammar and Spelling – Your schema should be free from grammatical, spelling, and usage errors. Each premise and the conclusion should be stated as a complete sentence. Completeness – Your schema should spell-out the argument in full; it should state each premise and the conclusion. This does not mean repeating everything that is said in the passage; instead, it means clearly presenting the entire argument contained in the passage. Sometimes the argument depends on debatable assumptions that are not explicitly stated in the passage; these are called ‘hidden premises.’ Your schema should include these assumptions as premises. Not every assumption should be stated, but if the argument depends on assumptions that one might not normally assume to be true, then these assumptions should be stated as premises in your schema. Missing premises will negatively impact your grade. Accuracy – Your schema should be faithful to the meaning of the passage, with each premise and conclusion capturing the meaning intended by the author. Organization and Argument Order