Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
Ai And Advocacy: Maximizing Potential, Minimizing Risk, Matthew Salzano, Nicholas Fung, Ada Lin, Sofia Marchetta, Faith Colombo, Kaylah Davis, John Flynn, Carlos Fuentes, Fion Li, Malar Paavi Muthukumaran, Angelica Paramoshin, Chrisanne Pearce, Vianney Ramos, Charles St. Hilaire, Xi Zheng, Wei Zhuang
Ai And Advocacy: Maximizing Potential, Minimizing Risk, Matthew Salzano, Nicholas Fung, Ada Lin, Sofia Marchetta, Faith Colombo, Kaylah Davis, John Flynn, Carlos Fuentes, Fion Li, Malar Paavi Muthukumaran, Angelica Paramoshin, Chrisanne Pearce, Vianney Ramos, Charles St. Hilaire, Xi Zheng, Wei Zhuang
School of Communication and Journalism Faculty Publications
New Generative AI tools are revolutionizing writing and communication. This report focuses on AI and advocacy, the act of influencing public policy and resource allocation decisions within political, economic, and social systems and institutions. This report identifies three major opportunities and accompanying risks, plus one strong recommendation for advocates considering using AI. We argue that AI can be useful for advocates, but they must be careful to center human judgment and avoid risks that could distract from their important work or even contribute to societal harms.
Just Trust Me (2023-2024), Gabrielle Wall
Just Trust Me (2023-2024), Gabrielle Wall
Argument
The argument essay, “Just Trust Me,” covers a range of sources, motives, and technologies involved in the spread of disinformation. From Google search results to AI generated content and deep fakes, Wall ultimately argues for regulation of AI and intervention from government organizations rather than banning information. Her argument focuses on the consequences, such as voting or health decisions that can stem from unregulated practices of disinformation.
The Great Unknown: Unlimited Artificial Intelligence (2023-2024), Kathryn O'Brien
The Great Unknown: Unlimited Artificial Intelligence (2023-2024), Kathryn O'Brien
Argument
O’Brien begins this argument essay with the following reminder that “We use A.I. every day without even realizing. There are so many different algorithms built into every single app we use, as well as search engines like Google.” She goes on to consider the use of Artificial Intelligence in algorithms, online information availability, healthcare, and the arts. Throughout the use of examples within these various contexts, O’Brien interrogates the need for limits to AI in order to counter bias, limit the prevalence of hate speech, and ultimately preserve our humanity.
Commentary On: Jianfeng Wang’S “Deep Disagreement, Deep Rhetoric, And Cultural Diversity", Jean Goodwin
Commentary On: Jianfeng Wang’S “Deep Disagreement, Deep Rhetoric, And Cultural Diversity", Jean Goodwin
OSSA Conference Archive
In this cogent paper, Wang urges argumentation theorists to pay attention to the myriad things that are happening whenever someone makes an argument. To do this he updates and extends the classical rhetorical cannon of style. He documents the importance of argumentative style through a case study of deep disagreement, showing how one arguer’s choices served to reconstruct an otherwise abusive situation. I urge him to continue the project by providing an equally cogent account of explaining why an arguer’s stylistic choices lead to the desired audience’s response.
Housing First To Address Homelessness (2019-2020), Caitlyn Gonzalez
Housing First To Address Homelessness (2019-2020), Caitlyn Gonzalez
Argument
In this student example we can see a clear stance is taken by Gonzales as she argues that vacant homes should be used to house the homeless based on a “Housing First” program model. Her argument draws on examples, narrative, and statistics to persuade the reader as to why this model of government and not-for-profit intervention would help homeless individuals and families recover financial and social stability.
Government Funding For The Arts (2019-2020), Michael Kravchenko
Government Funding For The Arts (2019-2020), Michael Kravchenko
Argument
In this example of an argument, Kravchenko makes the case for the need for continued funding for arts education. He points out the benefits of a funded arts education as increasing creativity, child development, and future career opportunities.
The Case For Less Immigration Restrictions In The United States (2019-2020), Elle O’Leary Kelleher
The Case For Less Immigration Restrictions In The United States (2019-2020), Elle O’Leary Kelleher
Argument
In this example of an argument, Kelleher explores how the issue of immigration has been taken up in politics and policy, but rests on many misperceptions, including the negative portrayal of immigrants in popular culture ranging from 1931 to 2013. Kelleher argues for a loosening of immigration restrictions based on benefits to the United States and based on a historical sense of “American values.”
The Logical Fallacies In Political Discourse, Zilin Cidre Zhou
The Logical Fallacies In Political Discourse, Zilin Cidre Zhou
Summer Research Program
I examined the use of logical fallacies in political discourse. Logical fallacies are fraudulent tricks people use in their argument to make it sound more credible while what they really do is to fool the audience. Out of more than 300 kinds of fallacies, I focused on 18 common ones by analyzing their use in debates about political issues. During conducting my research, I noted that being aware of my mental state is very important if I want to accurately detect the fallacies. Furthermore, while watching two sides debating, being impartial is as significant as staying calm. I also need …
Demonstrating Objectivity In Controversial Science Communication: A Case Study Of Gmo Scientist Kevin Folta, Jean Goodwin
Demonstrating Objectivity In Controversial Science Communication: A Case Study Of Gmo Scientist Kevin Folta, Jean Goodwin
OSSA Conference Archive
Scientists can find it difficult to be seen as objective within the chaos of a civic controversy. This paper gives a normative pragmatic account of the strategy one GMO scientist used to demonstrate his trustworthiness. Kevin Folta made his talk expensive by undertaking to answer all questions, and carried out this responsibility by acting as if every comment addressed to him—even the most hostile—was in fact a question in good faith. This presumption of audience good faith gave in turn his audience good reason to presume his good faith, and a situation of reciprocal distrust was transformed into one with …
Arguing With God: An Honest Conversation, Barry Fike
Arguing With God: An Honest Conversation, Barry Fike
Barry D. Fike
For the Jew, “I beg to differ” has been an enduring tactic of achieving and affirming identity. The Jew had addressed the same caveat to God—not in self-contradiction, but in dialectic aiming at attainment of fuller realization of who he is, as Jew and as human being. In asking about God, we examine our own selves: whether we are sensitive to the grandeur and supremacy of what we ask about, whether we are wholeheartedly concerned with what we ask about. Unless we are involved, we fail to sense the issue.
Linking Identity And Dialect Through Stancetaking, Barbara Johnstone
Linking Identity And Dialect Through Stancetaking, Barbara Johnstone
Barbara Johnstone
No abstract provided.
Reasons For Reason-Giving In A Public-Opinion Survey, Martha S. Cheng, Barbara Johnstone
Reasons For Reason-Giving In A Public-Opinion Survey, Martha S. Cheng, Barbara Johnstone
Barbara Johnstone
No abstract provided.
Wigmore's Chart, Jean Goodwin
Wigmore's Chart, Jean Goodwin
Jean Goodwin
A generation before Beardsley, legal scholar John Henry Wigmore invented a scheme for representing arguments in a tree diagram, aimed to help advocates analyze the proof of facts at trial. In this essay, I describe Wigmore's "Chart Method" and trace its origin and influence. Wigmore, I argue, contributes to contemporary theory in two ways. His rhetorical approach to diagramming provides a novel perspective on problems about the theory of reasoning, premise adequacy, and dialectical obligations. Further, he advances a novel solution to the problem of assessing argument quality by representing the strength of argument in meeting objections.