Phil 252 Assignment 2

1. If there were “buffer zones” for wildlife protection around national parks, then it is possible that large mammals such as bears could have enough habitat to survive. But that is not so—we allow strip mining and every other type of development right outside of national parks, with no restrictions. The conclusion is obvious.

By the argument made in this passage, the author is likely protesting against the land area around the national parks being used for strip mining. By saying the conclusion is obvious; it indicates how the author is upset about the disregard of wild-life protection. Strip mining in such close proximity to the national parks disturb wildlife and its habitat. The author thinks that having a buffer zone around the parks will help better protect wildlife.

Even though the author has a valid point by saying more space for the national parks can benefit the wildlife, mining in that area will not disturb wildlife. You can have other activities that develop the area that will not disturb the wildlife such as tourism or look-out points and trails which will also preserve the area. Creating tourism and other activities in the buffer zones will also discourage any illegal poaching of animals.

The author is making a point about buffer zones for the national parks. The buffer zones are to give the animals a larger natural habitat and to keep the wildlife away from disturbance of human activity. However, this kind of approach opens up risks of poaching. Mammals that are at risk of extinction are in danger due to poaching. The author’s argument is not specific and should not be accepted as fact.

2. a) Test the following syllogistic form for validity using a Venn diagram. Be sure to label your diagram, and indicate whether the syllogism is valid or not.

Some S are P

All M are S

Therefore, some P are not M

This syllogism is valid

P

P

S

S

X

X

M

b) If possible, supply the missing premise or conclusion of the following enthymeme in such a way that the...