Unit 6: Weapons of Mass Persuasion

Learning Objectives

• Construct and deconstruct arguments using deductive and inductive reasoning, identifying logical strengths and fallacies.

• Apply the Socratic questioning framework (Paul & Elder) to interrogate assumptions, evidence, and conclusions in written and spoken arguments.

• Build credible, evidence-based arguments on assigned topics and evaluate them across multiple rounds of peer critique.

• Analyze ethical dimensions of arguments using major moral frameworks, including deontology, consequentialism, and virtue ethics.

• Apply the Toulmin Model to real arguments, with emphasis on identifying and articulating warrants and underlying assumptions.

• Evaluate what makes a debate topic substantive, arguable, and intellectually generative; distinguishing reasoned disagreement from opinion or rhetoric.

• Collaborate within assigned debate roles (leader, researcher, contrarian, and Socratic questioner)to construct and deliver structured arguments.

• Develop public speaking, rapid rebuttal, and critical listening skills within a formal debate context.

Key Graded Assignments

Fallacy This! Students write an intentionally flawed argument, engineered with logical fallacies, weak reasoning, and faulty evidence. A classmate then "assassinates" the argument by identifying and explaining the logical errors embedded within it. This introductory assignment builds familiarity with fallacy types, deductive and inductive reasoning structures, and the anatomy of argument from the ground up.

FART (Factual Authority for Repurposing Trust): Inspired by the mechanics of troll farms and influence operations, students construct a well-researched, credible-seeming argument on an assigned topic. The argument is then subjected to three rounds of peer assassination: fallacy and logic identification, Socratic questioning (grounded in the Paul & Elder framework), and a formal written rebuttal. This project challenges students to build arguments that hold up under serious scrutiny, and to develop the critical tools to dismantle those that don't.

Debate: Students participate in one or two formal debates (depending on available time), working in instructor-assigned groups. Before any argument is built, students must propose and justify their debate topic. This key part of the unit forces students to distinguish a genuinely arguable question from a rant, a vent, or a false dilemma. Debates follow a hybrid format drawing from Oxford-style debate and the American legal system. Each group assigns internal roles (leader, researcher, contrarian, and Socratic questioner) to ensure every member contributes to both strategy and execution. Arguments are constructed using the Toulmin Model, with particular focus on warrants and assumptions, supported by research methods drawn from The Craft of Research, 5th edition.