Capella University Children and Parental Development Discussion

Creating an Inductively Strong argument

This week we are learning about the power of inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is not only extremely common, but it can also provide very good evidence for conclusions. This discussion prompt allows you to present an inductive version of the argument that you have been developing in this course.

Prepare: To prepare to write this discussion, read Chapters 5 and 6, focusing especially the section on “Strengthening Inductive Reasoning” in Chapter 5.

Reflect: Create two new inductive versions of the argument that you have been developing throughout this course, i.e., the two arguments that you presented in Week 1.

ORDER NOW FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

(Argument 1 from week 1: Article Supporting That Time Out is a Suitable Discipline Method for Child Development)

The first article is from a site named Parenting for Brain, a dedicated webpage in creating reader empowerment with research-backed and comprehensive parenting information. The report outlines that the application of time out in child discipline has become more prevalent in correcting inappropriate children’s behavior. The following premises support the article:

• Premise 1: Parenting is all about training and helping children develop better behavior
• Premise 2: Time outs places a misbehaving child in learning self-control as the ultimate goal in dealing with problems.
• Premise 3: Studies show that this method teaches the child the ability to reassess situations to calm down to the needed energy level.
• Premise 4: Research indicates that the positive reinforcement associated with time outs remove the kid from a higher reinforced condition to a place reduced stimuli position.

Conclusion: Time outs method of child discipline is effective for behavior development and should be done with a loving approach and not with hostility (Li, 2021). Capella University Children and Parental Development Discussion

(Argument 2 from week 1: An Article That Discourages the Time Outs Child Discipline Method)

The article that discourages the application of time outs strategy is from the Time website, a weekly American newspaper that publishes information concerning its subscribers. The article

talks about a case whereby Unruh and his wife were denied child adoption due to their parenting style, which included time-outs as a discipline method (Heid, 2019). The following premises support the idea:

• Premise 1: Studies have shown that time outs exclude children and can convey the message of “figure this out on your own and calm yourself down.”
• Premise 2: Recent research has indicated that children disciplined through time outs tend to develop mental health issues like depression, anxiety, self-control problems, rule-breaking behaviors, and aggression.
• Premise 3: Ideas that support time outs are based on psychologist interventions that can fully control the method, but this does not happen in real situations when parents use time outs.

Conclusion: Time outs should be adapted to the time-in strategy; an inclusive method that enables communication with the children in a free spaced environment to show that the parent is available to help calm the misbehaved child while also instilling good behavior (Heid, 2019).

Try to make sure that all of your premises are true and that your reasoning is inductively strong. Again, consider how someone with the opposite point of view might criticize your argument and see if you can improve it to avoid those objections.

Write: Present your two arguments in standard form and explain any weaknesses that might remain. A weakness could mean a premise that many might disagree with or questions about the strength of the inference. Indicate briefly how you might address those weaknesses to strengthen your argument further. What further information might strengthen your inductive argument the most?

Two peer responses:

Peer 1TR

Is it permissible to use capital punishment on persons convicted of certain crimes?

In favor of argument:

Premise 1: According to recent studies, violent criminals sentenced to life in prison cost taxpayers billions of dollars every year.

Premise 2: The surviving victims of violent criminals deserve justice.

Premise 3: The death penalty promotes moral order and saves lives.

Conclusion: Therefore, capital punishment is justified for convicted criminals that are convicted of certain crimes.

Opposing argument:

Premise 1: Aggressive policing has put pressure on law enforcement to solve crimes within 48 hours.

Premise 2: Since 1989, there have been 2,721 exonerations.

Premise 3: 80% of felony defendants charged with a violent crime could not afford a lawyer of their choice.

Conclusion: Therefore, capital punishment should not be permissible on persons convicted of certain crimes.

In creating two new inductive versions of my arguments, a weakness can still be that some premises are based on some biases. Some people may argue that victims of violent crimes do not need a person put to death to feel like justice has been served. I can address the weaknesses by either replacing the premise with another claim or finding a study or poll of victims that are against or in favor of capital punishment. Adding additional premises could future strengthen my arguments.

Peer 2:DM

Hello everyone,

Should sex education be taught in schools?

Argument for

Premise 1: Sex education teaches students about contraception and how to reduce teen pregnancy.

Premise 2: The teen pregnancy rate hit an all time low in 2016 when teens had access to sex education classes.

Conclusion: Sex education helps bring down the teen pregnancy rates.

This argument may be considered weak because premise 2 says that the teens had access to the sex education classes but it doesn’t mean that they took it. It may be possible that these teens may have gotten their information from their parents.

Argument against

Premise 1: Sex education is embarrassing for the teachers to teach and students to hear.

Premise 2: The information shared is more clinical than practical.

Conclusion: Sex education information is too clinical and embarrassing to teach or learn.

This argument seems to be valid but can be argued. If the teachers are ones that specialize in the area of sexual interactions than the students may feel comfortable in getting the information.

I am still having some confusion when it comes to writing these out. So any and all feedback is greatly appreciated.

Guided Response: Read the arguments presented by your classmates and analyze the reasoning that they have presented. Comment on the strength of their reasoning. Help them out by pointing out any respect in which a reasonable person might disagree with the truth of their premises or with the strength of their reasoning. Give suggestions for how the argument might be improved..