This last 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 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

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 ONE HUNDRED WORDS words]For help crafting a good thesis statement (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
• , go to the Ashford Writing Center (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
• .
• 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 ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY 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 counter-example, 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 THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY 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 ]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 scholarlyresearch source. See the "Practicing Effective Criticism" section of Chapter 9 of the course text for more information.
• Defend your argument against the objection. [Approximately TWO HUNDRED 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 try to best explain why your argument is sound or cogent despite the objections.
• Provide an appropriate conclusion. [Approximately SEVENTY FIVE ]For guidance about how to develop a conclusion see the Introductions and Conclusion (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
• resource from the Ashford Writing Center.

For further instruction check out the links for arguments, see the How to Construct a Valid DeductiveArgument (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

and Tips for Creating an Inductively Strong Argument (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

documents as well as the Contructing Valid Arguments Video (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

. For an example of a completed Final Paper, see the Annotated Example The Ethics of Elephants in Circuses (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

 

 

The Final Argument Paper

Ashford Writing Center (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

 

• Must use at least three scholarly sources in addition to the course text.The Scholarly, Peer Reviewed, and Other Credible Sources table (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
• 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 A.P.A style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center (for more information about how to check A.P.A reference list see the Ashford Writing Center APA References List (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
• webpage).
• Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to A.P.A style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Carefully review the Grading Rubric (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment. 

 

I attached my last assignment with the teachers review for guidance, and also the feedback he provided.  The paper is the right length, I really need a VERY GOOD review, and update the assignment to CHANGE the paper per the instructors guidance.

Running head: PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS 1 Performance Enhancing Drugs
Mark D. Heitkamp
PHI 103 Informal Logic
Instructor: Noel Sauer
August 27, 2017 [no notes on this page] -1- PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS
2 Performance Enhancing Drugs
1 In this paper, I will select the counterargument on performance enhancing drug. 1. In this paper, I will select
the counterargument on
performance enhancing
drug.
Revised original argument
and counter-argument should
immediately be presented in
premise-conclusion form
[Noel Sauer] 2 Performance enhancing drugs are disallowed in driving aggressive games the world over. The
World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), accomplishes the possibility that the spirit of the
amusement is a celebration of the human soul, body, and mind and that doping are on a
fundamental level in opposition to what is characteristically profitable about the game. In today 2. Performance enhancing
drugs are disallowed in
driving aggressive games
the world over.
Is this a premise? If so, it's
circular...the central question
is what PEDs should be
banned at all. [Noel Sauer] athletic world there is an extended need for physical faultlessness, which is the reason execution
improving medications are on an appeal for proficient competitors. The use of these medicines is
a gigantic issue in many diversions. These contenders need to keep taking pharmaceuticals to
stay before various contenders taking medications. An extensive part of these contenders deny
they use execution improving medications and if they do take them, they say they're not
dependent (Scott, 2008).
There was a Dateline unique on TV fourteen days back that demonstrated what number
3 of expert competitors utilize these medications for the hugest of brandishing occasion. Marian
Jones won three gold awards at the 2000 Olympics, and Mark Maguire hit 62 grand slams to
outperformed Roger Marisís record of 61; both astounding competitors were clients of execution
improving medications. Both of those competitors seen as the best at their sport. Competitors
that take tranquilizes regularly turn into the best at their brandish. They make millions of dollars
and a considerable measure of distinction. To keep up this physical condition, competitors figure
they should continue taking medications to maintain the cash and acclaim. These competitors -2- 3. There was a Dateline
unique on TV fourteen days
back that demonstrated
what number of expert
competitors utilize these
medications for the hugest
of brandishing occasion.
Wording highly
problematic/confusing
Review required organization
for paper...aim of
paragraph/discussion unclear
[Noel Sauer] PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS
3
that took an alternate route to begin are as yet endeavoring to remain ahead by manhandling
steroids or execution improving medications.
Numerous competitors say they have to take the drugs to stay aware of others utilizing
drugs. If that is the situation, these performance-enhancing drugs must prohibit from every
wearing occasion. Arbitrary tests get numerous competitors. Each expert game event ought to
have a medical test before each amusement, and have random drug tests whenever amid the 1. Numerous competitors
say they have to take the
drugs to stay aware of
others utilizing drugs. If
that is the situation, these
performance-enhancing
drugs must prohibit from

Attachments:

• 1505925683-Teachers Review.docx
• 1505925691-Performance_Enhancing_Drugs__2__12514520-notes-export Final.pdf