HUM 115 Wk 4 – Arguments Worksheet

0 items
HUM 115 Wk 4 - Arguments Worksheet
HUM 115 Wk 4 – Arguments Worksheet
$8.00
Go to the store page
  • Description

HUM 115 Wk 4 – Arguments Worksheet

As a critical thinker, it is important to understand the elements of an argument and how certain types of statements can affect the validity of an argument. As you learned in the readings this week, arguments are used to convince us of an outcome. You read about how to identify an issue, the role that issues play in arguments, how to differentiate between an argument and rhetoric, and the different types of arguments you may encounter. In this assignment, you will evaluate arguments for and against the use of facial recognition technology and then respond to questions about the issue.

 

Complete the Arguments Worksheet.

 

Submit your assignment.

 

Review both the pro and con argument articles on facial recognition from the University Library and then answer the following questions (your response to each question should be 50-100 words long):

  1. Identify the author and source (publisher) of the pro facial recognition article (using link provided above). Do you think this author/source is credible? Why or why not? (Hint: Review the author’s background, authority, etc.)

James O’Neill is the author of the pro article. He is also the police commissioner for the New York Police Department (NYPD) with nearly 40 years of professional experience well versed in the Facial Recognition technology. He has firsthand knowledge of the technology and is proficient in its effectiveness.

  1. What is one reason (premise) the author gives for supporting his conclusion that facial recognition software is beneficial and necessary?  What evidence, statistics and/or outside sources does he provide to support this reason?

In 2018, detectives made 7,024 requests to the Facial Identification Section, and in 1,851 cases possible matches were returned, leading to 998 arrests. Some investigations are still being conducted and some suspects have not been apprehended. The software has also cleared suspects His thinking is that when the technology is used in it’s proper sense the miscarriage of justice is a rarity

  1. Identify the author and source (publisher) of the con facial recognition article (using link provided above). Do you think this author/source is credible? Why or why not?

Farhad Manjoo is the author of the con article who is an opinion columnist with the New York Times that cites the findings of researchers at Georgetown University. Manjoo posits that, while facial recognition technology may hold some benefits, its use should be carefully regulated.

  1. What is one reason (premise) the author gives for supporting his conclusion that facial recognition software can be detrimental and needs to be put on hold for now?  What evidence, statistics and/or outside sources does he provide to support this reason?

Two new reports by Clare Garvie, a researcher who studies facial recognition at Georgetown Law, brought the dangers home for me. In one report — written with Laura Moy, executive director of Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy & Technology — Ms. Garvie uncovered municipal contracts indicating that law enforcement agencies in Chicago, Detroit and several other cities are moving quickly, and with little public notice, to install Chinese-style ”real time” facial recognition systems. The author questions the Facial Recognition software because there is little to no oversight.

  1. Which of these articles do you feel met all the criteria of a strong argument (clear, relevant, credible, complete, and sound) and why (explain how the article meets each criterion in your response)?

I am pretty much in agreement with the con perspective. Facial recognition frameworks can deliver fiercely erroneous outcomes, particularly for non-whites, as indicated by a US government study delivered Thursday that is probably going to raise new questions on sending of the man-made consciousness innovation. The investigation of many facial acknowledgment calculations demonstrated “bogus positives” rates for Asian and African American as much as multiple times higher than for whites.

  1. After reviewing and analyzing both articles, what do you think is the value of understanding multiple viewpoints before forming an opinion or argument?