Modr

Intro to 3rd argument to be added….

Claytor’s fourth argument about television can be mapped as follows: P1 At first we may constrict our viewing to one or two well-chosen programs, but soon we are plugged into it. P2 How many can resist? P3 Soon we have a favourite program, one that can’t be missed. P4 Before long we are being led by TV schedules and not even the VCR can free us from the need to stay tuned. P5 If we are unable to connect with TV for 24 hours we fear we may miss something. P6 When we start to worry about missing Murphy Brown, we can be defined as being hooked indeed. [P7 see handout]. C A house with a TV is a house of addiction.

This argument commits the fallacy of ….., a fallacy of ….. P1 This argument tries to prove its conclusion b….. P2 Unfortunately, there is a logical and conceptual problem here. P3 Using the false, hidden presumption that [P?], which is false because it violates the argument principle (…….), a logical problem which could have been avoided if the author had understood the concept of …, in which case the argument fails to prove its conclusion. C Therefore, this argument commits the fallacy of …, a fallacy of …. (slippery slope)

Claytor’s fifth argument about television can be mapped as follows: P1 Television has become like an electronic peep show. P2 It is filled with portrayals of violence against women, children, men, and nature. P3 News and drama are saturated with violence, interspersed with the ubiquitous commercial, a true crime against humanity. P4 The droning bleat of the commercial carries the constant message that viewers are not complete unless they own what the TV is selling, including lifestyle. P5 The viewer is caught, sitting enthralled by the light emanating from the box, much like a deer caught in the head lights of a car at night. [P6 see handout]. C Regular exposure to TV fills the house with anxiety.

This argument commits the fallacy of ….., a fallacy of ….. P1 This argument tries to prove its...