In this paper, I want you to research perspectives on a debated social issue for which you have a strong opinion. Try not to pick a subject in which there really isn’t an “other side.” So, for example, a bad subject to write on would take the stance that “cancer is a horrible disease” – because everybody agrees. Try to find something you believe in strongly in which a sizeable number of Americans would disagree. Some EXAMPLES might be:
The minimum wage needs to be increased.
Climate change is not a serious issue.
Vaccinations have been important for helping Americans living healthier lives.
The gender wage gap has been mostly eliminated.
Religion is no longer necessary in modern society.
Immigration is good for the United States.
Young people today need to “toughen up.”
Abstinence-only education is the best way to teach teens about sex.
The United States needs stronger gun regulations.
Drug laws need to be much harsher.
While you can choose to take either side of the above arguments, you can, of course, pick any debatable issue. You are going to have to research the opposing side, so keep that in mind when deciding the topic of your paper.
You’ll need to write your paper in sections. Here is the format:
PART ONE: INTRODUCE YOUR ARGUMENT
In this section, you need to introduce the issue for which you make an argument for or against. You need to say why this issue is important to you. In doing so, you need to identify which moral foundations (that we discussed in class) you draw from when considering your stance on the issue.
Next, you need to find at least five sources that back up your opinion. At least three of these sources need to be somewhat scholarly. That means they need to be something like a journal article, book, government website, research report from groups like Pew Research or Gallup, or come from reputable newspapers with some degree of research reporting like the New York Times or Wall Street Journal. At least two of your sources must be opinion-based. This can really be anything. You can choose articles on random websites or even YouTube videos.
Once you have your resources put together, you will need to provide some information about them: 1) State if the source seems reputable (you can do basic internet searches to see if they are considered to be of high quality, read from the organizations website, do some background searches on the author etc… ) State if the publication itself, the publishing company/organization, or the authors have known political biases (you can do this by reading/watching the content along with basic internet searches to “vet” the sources. 3) Identify if the source is primarily using a central or peripheral route to make the argument, and 4) Identify which moral foundations, if any, are being used to make the argument. Keep track of your findings in the table provided. In your paper, write about each source one-by-one. Then provide a quick summary of how well reasoned these arguments seem to you.
PART 2: RESEARCH AND REPORT THE OPPOSING SIDE
Now you need to use the same process that you used to research the “pro” side of the argument to dig into the “con” side. You again need at least five sources. At least three must be scholarly and at least two must be opinion pieces. Write a narrative that describes the sources using the same process you used for the “pro” side: 1) check reputability, 2) check political bias, 3) identify route, and 4) identify moral foundations. Again, add this information to the table provided and write a narrative that describes each article, one at a time. Then write a quick summary for how well reasoned the opposing arguments seem.
PART 3: SYNTHSIZE YOUR FINDINGS AND PROVIDE A CONCLUSION
This is where you tie it all together. In the conclusion section, answer these questions: How do the “pro” and “con” sources differ? Was it easier to find scholarly sources that supported your argument – or the opposing argument? Did one side of the argument seem to be more politically biased? Did you find differences in moral foundations that were engaged between the arguments? Did one of the sides use more central/peripheral arguments? Could you spot any of the biases we discussed in class? Most importantly, how do you feel about your stance on the issue after thoroughly looking through information from both the pro and con sides? Did it make you feel stronger about your belief? Is your opinion unchanged? Did some of the con resources make sense enough to change parts or all of your position? Finally, what do you think about people who believe the opposite of you on this issue? Can understanding their moral foundations (even if different than your own) make you more empathetic to their point of view, even if you still disagree?
Since you are filling in the table, you don’t need a works cited section.
