Showing posts with label critical thinking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label critical thinking. Show all posts

Sunday, February 14, 2016

From Slate: What Made Antonin Scalia a Great Writer: The novelty of his language, his use of metaphor, and his wicked sense of humor.

This might be a useful look at one of the Justice's skills - his writing. Supreme Court opinions tend to be well written. As you struggle with multiple writing assignments this semester, you could do worse than try to emulate his style.

- Click here for the article.

To understand what makes Antonin Scalia’s prose compelling—demanding of attention—we need to understand what makes certain language memorable and others forgettable. First and foremost, Scalia’s use of metaphors deserves attention. Part of what makes his style persuasive, even as criticism, is its novelty. Clichés are the archetypal use of outworn language and the bane of bad legal writing. In the words of one judge, a “cluster [of clichés] robs the opinion of the sudden insight which imparts persuasion.” 
But even clichés can leave a memorable impression with the reader if they are used in an unexpected way.
Take this lone dissent by Scalia, from Morrison v. OlsonThat is what this suit is about. Power. The allocation of power among Congress, the President, and the courts in such fashion as to preserve the equilibrium the Constitution sought to establish. … Frequently an issue of this sort will come before the Court clad, so to speak, in sheep’s clothing: the potential of the asserted principle to effect important change in the equilibrium of power is not immediately evident, and must be discerned by a careful and perceptive analysis. But this wolf comes as a wolf.
The biblical allusion to a wolf in sheep’s clothing is a metaphor that has been used countless times to convey the message that appearances can be deceiving. In this case, however, the metaphor conveys just the opposite: There is no disguise here, no sheep’s clothing, appearances are what they are—clear.

Friday, September 5, 2014

The Critical Thinking Assessment

I want you to apply your critical thinking skills to an issue raised in one of the major stories so far this semester: the indictment of Governor Perry on two counts: (1) Abuse of Official Capacity and (2) Coercion of a Public Servant.

Together these two counts have led a special prosecutor to claim that the governor has abused his power, but that phrase sounds a bit vague. The governor's supporters have defended him by saying what he did - use his line item veto power to cut funding to the Public Integrity Unit in Travis County - was within his constitutional powers as governor. Opponents disagree by pointing out - as an example - that while one has a right to vote, one does not have a right to sell your vote. It's not the activity, but the circumstances surrounding the activity that are at issue.

Regardless, each suggests that we have some understanding of what the phrase "abuse of power" really means. That's what I want you to use your critical thinking skills to determine. Read up on the conflict - you might want to look at this old post - and try to determine how the term is in fact used by various commentators. What does it mean to say that an elected official abused their power? Critically assess how the term is being used and try to determine if it is being used properly.

One thing to note: there is no statute in the penal code regarding the abuse of power. Instead there are the two charges mentioned above. For clarity on each, click on the appropriate part of the Texas Penal Code.

Abuse of Official Capacity 39.02.
Coercion of a Public Servant. 36.03.

Keep in mind that this is meant to be an objective exercise. Base your analysis on facts, and your rational interpretations of them, not your personal opinions of the governor or the range of people involved in the case.

This is due at the end of the semester - write as much or as little as you like, as long as you answer the question properly. Turn it in in Blackboard.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Do you want to improve your thinking?

Of course you do. So do I.

Here are seven tools for doing so:

1 - Use your mistakes
2 - Respect your opponent
3 - The use of "surely" indicates a weak argument
4 - Answer rhetorical questions
5 - Employ Occam's Razor
6 - Don't waste your time on rubbish
7 - Beware of deepities

carry on....