Should the United States government pay reparations to African-Americans?
This debate involves all the building blocks of logic, and elements of rhetoric, that you’ve been exploring.
The critical thinking context: This assignment asks you to apply the logical & rhetorical elements you’ve worked on:
understanding each speaker’s line of reasoning – premises and conclusions, induction or deduction as relevant;
distinguishing between statements of fact, inference and judgment;
listening for any unspoken assumptions;
noting effective use of rhetorical strategies (audience outreach, counter-arguments, metaphors and storytelling);
ESSAY QUESTION: Summarize the debate, listing the premises on both sides, and consider: After reading the contributions from Coates, Coleman, Williamson and Cohen, which side makes the most compelling case?
Readings:
Ta-Nehisi Coates – Testimony to Congress in favor of reparations, June 2019 & Coleman Hughes – Testimony to Congress against reparations, June 2019 – both in the Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/19/reparations-slavery-ta-nehisi-coates-v-coleman-hughes
Seth Cohen. “An Overdue Debt.” Forbes, 6/21/2020
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sethcohen/2020/06/21/its-finally-time-to-pay-black-americans-reparations/?sh=2a3c73665cb5
pdf here: An Overdue Debt – Cohen.pdf
Kevin Williamson: “The Case Against Reparations,” National Review Online, 5/24/2014
https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/05/case-against-reparations-kevin-d-williamson/
pdf: Case Against Reparations – Williamson.pdf.
OPTIONAL (this is an excellent article, but it’s very long, so don’t feel obliged!):
Ta-Nehisi Coates: “The Case For Reparations.” The Atlantic, June 2014.
At the Atlantic website: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/
or the pdf: http://pscourses.ucsd.edu/ps108/6%20Reparations/Coates%202014-%20The%20Case%20for%20Reparations.pdf
Tackling this assignment:
Where to start: You don’t have to anatomize every element of all these articles. Start by thinking about what you found most striking, persuasive (or not persuasive!).
Thesis: You don’t have to pick a side; you might have been persuaded by one or other side in this debate, or you might feel like people on both sides have made an equally good case.
Audience: Think of yourself as addressing a reader who knows nothing of the debate over reparations. You’ve done some reading; so you are the expert. You should summarize the debate briefly, and make sure readers understand the reasons on both sides.
Organization suggestion: You don’t need to summarize each speaker. Coleman, Coates, Williams and Cohen make overlapping points. You can summarize the pros and cons.
Texts: Your argument must be based in the assigned readings: Coleman, Coates, Williamson and Cohen. You don’t need to quote each of them, but you should quote at least a couple of them as relevant.
Logic and rhetoric analysis: There’s no need to anatomize every premise, or to identify every inference or metaphor. But your summary of the debate overall should reflect your ability to simplify an argument to premises and conclusions; and your discussion of what is and isn’t convincing should reflect an understanding of the sorts of claims the writers are making. If you are unconvinced by someone’s argument, do you have problems with their judgments? Do you feel they haven’t justified an inference? Has the speaker used a metaphor that you think isn’t helpful – or hasn’t effectively reached out to the opposition?
Idea draft: Use the idea draft as a way to get started.
Related Completed Projects
Briefly describe your example and then discuss how an ethical subjectivist would justify the moral indifference or lack of action you witnessed.
Discuss Healthcare law or Ethics.
Write a Discussion -Safety in Healthcare Facilities
,Write a paper on the Literature Related to the Effectiveness of Advertising Appeals with Customer Value Proposition Research Gap Hypothesis Methodology 10 pages Sampling Data Collection Data Analyses