Philosophy

 

Before you submit your initial post, make sure to read the assigned chapter. Then, ask yourself the following: Did the article in Chapter 6 of the text seem credible and reliable? Why? Be very specific:

  • Was it because it is in a textbook?
  • Because it was written by a learned and respected person?
  • Because of content in the article?
  • Because of your previous knowledge of the SPLC?

 

  • Conduct additional research on the SPLC. Did your opinion alter in any way? Why?

Only after you have done some responsible research should you begin to respond to the discussion prompt. The discussion is not about the SPLC; it is not about Dr. Facione. It is about what you have learned about forming opinions.

Your post must answer this question:

  • How do you define the term “expert”?

Your post must also discuss at least two (2) of the following questions:

  • How important are facts in the process of forming an opinion? Explain what you believe to be the purpose or function of facts in making a judgment.
  • How did you respond to the self-assessment question? Since doing further research, have you re-thought the way in which you assess credibility and reliability? What is the importance of factoring the recency of a reference or opinion (i.e., how old is it?) into an assessment of credibility and reliability?
  • How would you evaluate Dr. Facione’s claim “The SPLC is an expert on hate in America” (p. 124). Does the SPLC fit your definition of “expert”? Be specific in your answer.