University of Florida Americas Unjust Drug War Case Study Please read the course guide carefully Prompt: Summarize the argument of Michael Huemer’s articl

University of Florida Americas Unjust Drug War Case Study Please read the course guide carefully

Prompt: Summarize the argument of Michael Huemer’s article “America’s Unjust Drug War”, then give an original objection to a premise or the support for a premise.

Details:

1. Read Huemer’s “America’s Unjust Drug War”, available at:

http://www.owl232.net/papers/drugs.htm

2. Write 1.5 pages.

3. First summarize the main argument in valid premise-conclusion form (i.e., “numbered”

form). Do this in your own words.

4. Then say how, if at all, the author supports each premise. (If the author offers no support

for a premise, simply state that this is so.)

5. Finally, give an objection, either to a premise or to the author’s support for one of the

premises.

6. (So, the standard paper will have a numbered argument at the beginning, then a paragraph—

possibly two—describing the support the author offers for each premise. Finally there will

be a paragraph or two offering an objection.)

7. Don’t worry about introductions or conclusions, or even transitions between paragraphs.

Don’t put anything for the heading except your full name.

8. Double-space, 1-inch margins, any normal font. (Don’t pick a big font so you don’t have to

write as much!)

9. Don’t worry about citations.

10. Don’t quote more than a few words. Paper Scaffolding: Part 1 | Summary of an Argument and Objection
Prompt: Summarize the argument of Michael Huemer’s article “America’s Unjust Drug War”, then
give an original objection to a premise or the support for a premise.
Details:
1. Read Huemer’s “America’s Unjust Drug War”, available at:
http://www.owl232.net/papers/drugs.htm
2. Write 1.5 pages.
3. First summarize the main argument in valid premise-conclusion form (i.e., “numbered”
form). Do this in your own words.
4. Then say how, if at all, the author supports each premise. (If the author offers no support
for a premise, simply state that this is so.)
5. Finally, give an objection, either to a premise or to the author’s support for one of the
premises.
6. (So, the standard paper will have a numbered argument at the beginning, then a paragraph—
possibly two—describing the support the author offers for each premise. Finally there will
be a paragraph or two offering an objection.)
7. Don’t worry about introductions or conclusions, or even transitions between paragraphs.
Don’t put anything for the heading except your full name.
8. Double-space, 1-inch margins, any normal font. (Don’t pick a big font so you don’t have to
write as much!)
9. Don’t worry about citations.
10. Don’t quote more than a few words.
Tips:
 One of the goals of the exercise is to be able to draw out the aspects of the passage that are
significant for the sake of the argument, and formulate these clearly and concisely. So:
o Don’t assume that every detail is relevant.
o Try to see “behind” rhetorical flourish to the philosophical claim being made or
supported.
 Formulate the argument and support in your own words. This requires you to really
understand what’s going on: it’s easy to parrot someone else’s language; it’s harder to say
what they mean in different terms. Plus, one skill the exercise is meant to encourage is
clarifying a not-totally-clear argument.
 It’s possible that a necessary premise is unstated in the excerpt. If you think it’s necessary for
the argument to be valid, put it in the argument. Then, in the “support” section, say that it’s
implicit but necessary, and why.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Submit a Comment