Suggestions and Guidelines for Peer-Group Editing of
Position Paper #5
Last Update: 12 April 2007
Note:
or
material is highlighted
When you get into your small groups, introduce yourselves quickly, and share
copies of your papers with each other.
Choose one paper to discuss first. (Suggestion: Go in
alphabetical order by family name.)
After spending about 10–15 minutes on the first paper, move on to
the next, going back to step (2) above, changing roles. Spend no
more than 15 minutes per paper (because you've only got about 45 minutes
at most). Perhaps one member of the group can be a timekeeper.
Suggestion: There are really 2 arguments in this dialogue: Pro's
argument
and Con's argument.
So, the first task is to present each argument. Once you have
identified the premises (including any hidden premises) and conclusion
of each argument, you can then analyze it for
validity of the argument and truth of the premises.
For each paper in your peer-editing group,
ask as many of the following questions as you have time for:
Did the author present both Pro's and Con's arguments?
For each argument, did the author state whether and why
s/he believes the argument to be valid?
It's possible to formulate both arguments so that
they are valid!
If you do that, then ascertaining the truth
value of the premises becomes your central task.
For each argument, did the author state whether and why
s/he agrees with the premises?
For each argument, if the author believed either that the
argument was
invalid (even with missing premises addedi.e., that there
was no way to make the argument valid) or that one
or more of the premises was false, then did the author
state whether and why s/he agrees with the conclusion?
Reminder:
If you think an argument is sound,
then you are logically obligated to believe
its conclusion (and you don't have to give
any other justification for the conclusion).
If you don't believe the conclusion
of an argument, then it is either invalid
or else has at least one false premise; you
must identify which, and explain why.
If you think an argument is unsound
(either because it is invalid or has at least
one false premise), then you might still
believe the conclusion for other reasons;
in that case, you must give those other reasons.
Remember!: Your revised paper must have the appropriate heading
at the top of the first page, must use the terms "true", "false", "valid",
and "invalid" appropriately, and must have your peer-edited first drafts
attached! See
Position Paper 5 for details and
penalties!
Keep a written record of the questions and replies. This will be useful
to the author, for revision.
At home, over the next week, please revise your paper to take
into consideration the comments made by your fellow students
(i.e., your "peers"):
Perhaps defend your claims better, or clarify statements
that were misunderstood, etc. For help, see me.
1–2 PAGE (250–500 WORD) REVISION, 1 COPY, TYPED, SINGLE-SIDED, DOUBLE-SPACED,
IS DUE
MONDAY, APRIL 19.
NO LATE PAPERS WILL BE ACCEPTED!