PHL 320T All Discussions

The Latest Version A+ Study Guide

**********************************************

PHL 320T All Discussions Link

https://hwsell.com/category/phl-320t-all-discussions/

**********************************************

PHL 320T Wk 1 Discussion – Cognitive Bias

Post a total of 3 substantive responses over 2 separate days for full participation. This includes your initial post and 2 replies to other students.

Due Thursday

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:

Which of the cognitive biases discussed in this section do you think you might be most subject to?

• What might you do to compensate for this bias factor?

Due Monday

Reply to at least two of your classmates. Be constructive and professional in your responses.

PHL 320T Wk 2 Discussion – Dishonesty as a Character Issue

Post a total of 3 substantive responses over 2 separate days for full participation. This includes your initial post and 2 replies to other students.

Due Thursday

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:

Expertise doesn’t transfer automatically from one field to another: Being an expert in one area does not automatically qualify a person as an expert (or even as competent) in other areas. Is it the same with dishonesty? Many people think dishonesty does transfer, that being dishonest in one area automatically discredits that person in all areas. For example, when Bill Clinton lied about having sexual encounters with his intern, some said he couldn’t be trusted about anything.

Respond to the following:

• If someone is known to have been dishonest about one thing, should we automatically be suspicious of his or her honesty regarding other things?

Due Monday

Reply to at least two of your classmates. Be constructive and professional in your responses.

PHL 320T Wk 3 Discussion – Experiment Design

Post a total of 3 substantive responses over 2 separate days for full participation. This includes your initial post and 2 replies to other students.

Due Thursday

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:

Suppose a university teacher wants to know whether or not requiring attendance improves student learning. How could she find out? Describe an experiment that an instructor might actually use. Review the experiments posted by your classmates. Evaluate the pros and cons of their proposals, and when applicable, suggest improvements or ask follow-up questions.

Due Monday

Reply to at least two of your classmates. Be constructive and professional in your responses.

PHL 320T Wk 4 Discussion – Rhetorical Fallacies

Discussion Topic

Post a total of 3 substantive responses over 2 separate days for full participation. This includes your initial post and 2 replies to other students.

Due Thursday

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:

• Discuss an example of a rhetorical strategy or rhetorical fallacy that you might hear in the workplace.
• How might you use reasoning to counteract these arguments?

Due Monday

Reply to at least two of your classmates. Be constructive and professional in your responses.

PHL 320T Wk 5 Discussion – Clarifying a Statement

Discussion Topic

Post a total of 3 substantive responses over 2 separate days for full participation. This includes your initial post and 2 replies to other students.

Due Thursday

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:

In the textbook, “Vehicles are prohibited on the paths in the park” is used as an example of a law that might require clarification. Decide whether the law should be interpreted to forbid motorcycles, bicycles, children’s pedal cars, and battery-powered remote-control cars. On what grounds are you deciding each of these cases?

Due Monday

Reply to at least two of your classmates. Be constructive and professional in your responses.