CRTW 201 Paper Assignments, Dr. Fike

Note:  All papers and supporting documents must be submitted in a file folder with your name on the tab.  Supporting documents include a clean copy of the paper comment sheet from our website.  All four assignments must be submitted to turnitin.com.  I encourage you to set up your document with headings (e.g., Step One, Step Two, etc.).

 

Paper One:  SEEI Journal

 

Paper Two:  The Paranormal (20 points)

 

Your second paper is your major research project (8-10 pages), and it deals with a theme that typically receives short shrift in Western culture:  namely, the paranormal.  I want you to use your critical thinking skills outside the box this time.  There are many types of paranormal functioning; these include but may not be limited to the following (the most accessible topics are boldfaced):

·         Alien contact

·         Alternative dimensions or realities

·         Angels

·         Animal communication (this means PSYCHIC communication between animals and humans)

·         Astrology

·         Aura reading

·         Black magic

·         Channeling

·         Chi

·         Clairvoyance, clairaudience, clairsentience

·         Communicating with spirits (see especially John Edward)

·         Crop circles

·         Crystal ball reading

·         Demonic possession

·         Dreams (clairvoyance, precognition, contact with the dead, etc.)

·         ESP

·         Haunted houses/ghosts

·         Healing (e.g., Reiki)

·         Hypnosis

·         Intuition

·         Kinetic power

·         Lycanthropy (transformation into a wolf)

·         Magic

·         Meditation

·         Mediums

·         Nature spirits

·         Near-death experience (NDE)

·         Ouija boards

·         Out-of-body experience (OBE)

·         Past life reading

·         Past life regression

·         Poltergeist

·         Precognition

·         Prophecy

·         Psychometry (using a token object to do a psychic reading)

·         Remote viewing

·         Reincarnation

·         Seeing spirits/ghosts

·         Spoon bending

·         Tarot cards

·         Telekinesis

·         Therapeutic touch

·         UFOs

·         Witches

 

Note:  For this assignment, steps one through four are your PREWRITING.  Do not submit a document that includes these steps.  Submit only Step Five.

 

Step one:  Select as your topic one of the items in the above list (or something paranormal that is not on it—in the latter case, get my approval before you proceed).  Then write down where you started in your thinking process:  what you originally believe about it.

 

Note:  This assignment may be easier if you select a topic that you currently find dubious or know very little about.

 

Step two:  Within your topic, select an example—a focused topic—that will be your paper’s main illustration.  Here are two examples of how to narrow your topic.  If remote viewing is your topic, your focused topic could be a specific viewing by Pat Price, Joseph McMoneagle, or some other practitioner.  If ghosts are your topic, your focused topic could be the ghost in the Tillman Auditorium or one ghost in Charleston.

 

Note:  I will not let you generalize about a topic throughout your paper.  You must ground your remarks in the specifics of a focused topic.  If you do not understand the difference, come see me immediately!

 

Step three:  Do research on the type of paranormal activity that you have selected.  Be sure to get pro and con.  I have suggested a few places and names that will help you search (see below).  Again, be sure to tap into the proponents’ view and the skeptics’ view.

 

Step four:  Building on what you have discovered in your research, put your focused topic through the elements.  It will be especially important to make note of your own assumptions, impediments, and background stories as you go around the circle of elements.

 

Step five:  Write a classical argument that supports a controversial thesis ("Although…I will argue that…because…") about your focused topic. LABEL YOUR SECTIONS AS FOLLOWS:  INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND ONE, BACKGROUND TWO, ARGUMENTS, OBJECTIONS, REPLIES, CONCLUSION.

 

Note:   Here is the overall shape of this assignment.  State where you started in your thinking about a particular kind of paranormal activity.  Focus on an illustration of one specific paranormal phenomenon. Give your thesis statement.  Present your research findings on your focused topic.  Use the elements to analyze findings regarding the focused topic.  Then, in a classical argument, evaluate your original position and state what you have learned, especially about your preconceptions.  An outline of the paper that you will write might look roughly like the following:

·         Introduction:  Your original position on your general topic + your focused topic + a thesis that affirms your new view, your old view, or some combination of the two.  "Although...I will argue that...because...."

·         Background:  Your research findings (background one:  information on your topic; background two:  information/on the focused topic) + background three: an analysis of your focused topic by the other elements:  make this analysis part of your background section, not a separate document.  Be sure to underline and boldface the elements' names.  Note:  Every paragraph should forge a connection to (or be about) the focused topic.  WRITE ONLY 1-2 SENTENCES PER ELEMENT.  DO NOT WRITE A WHOLE PARAGRAPH FOR EACH ELEMENT!

·        Argument/objection/reply:  Execute your plan in the thesis.  The argument par. should include a statement by an authority who supports your the "I will argue that" clause in your thesis.  The objection par. should include a statement by an authority who supports the "although" clause in your thesis.  The reply par. should negotiate between these competing claims.

·         Conclusion:  Discuss what you have learned about your thinking.  Has your original position changed?  Has this project changed you as a thinker?  If so, how?  Discuss your impediments, biases, background stories, etc.  What are the implications and consequences (for you) of your inquiry into your focused topic?  Note:  It is a big error not to think about your thinking about your focused topic when you get to the conclusion.  You may need multiple paragraphs here.

 

Sources:  Here are some names and links to help you get started. 

 

·         This assignment is one place where Wikipedia may be a good place to start:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranormal_phenomena.  Although not an authoritative source in itself, this entry will point you in some helpful directions.  But please do not cite Wikipedia in your papers!  It is not a reliable source!  If you quote Wikipedia, you may be perpetuating inaccuracies or using plagiarized material.

·         For pro and con views, you can begin by searching the Parapsychological Association (http://parapsych.clubexpress.com/), the Institute of Noetic Sciences (http://www.ions.org/about/vision.cfm), the Skeptics’ Society (http://www.skeptic.com/), the Society for Scientific Exploration (http://www.scientificexploration.org/), and James Randi’s website (http://www.randi.org/).

·         Here are a few persons whose may spark insights for some of you:

o       Scientists:  Dean Radin (http://www.deanradin.com/NewWeb/bio.html; http://www.wie.org/bios/dean-radin.asp; J. B. Rhine (http://www.rhine.org/main.shtml); Charles T. Tart (http://www.paradigm-sys.com/); Hal Puthoff (http://www.parapsych.org/members/h_puthoff.html). 

o       Experiencers:  Robert A. Monroe (http://www.monroeinstitute.com/), Sylvia Browne (http://www.sylvia.org/home/index.cfm), John Edward (http://www.johnedward.net/), Joseph McMoneagle (http://www.mceagle.com/), Edgar Cayce (http://www.edgarcayce.org/about_are/outreach/international/internat_contact.asp). Hampton Roads Publishing Company's "Bookstore" includes many volumes that provide great examples of focused topics:  http://www.hamptonroadspub.com/bookstore/index. 

·         The great state of South Carolina, especially Charleston, is the site of reported paranormal activity; you are welcome to pick a focused topic that close to home if you wish (google “South Carolina ghosts”).  But please:  Don't all of you write the same boring paper about the ghost that foretells the coming of bad weather.

 

 

Details:  Click HERE for the comments that I wrote in response to my 08F students' papers.  A few additional suggestions:

·         You should have at least four sources for this assignment:

o       Something that explains your general topic (background one)

o       Something that conveys your specific focused topic (background two)

o       Pro view (argument par.)

o       Con view (objection par.)

·         If both pro and con can be about the specific focus rather than merely about the general topic, your paper will be more successful.  Obviously, this will require digging on your part.

·         Some of you will be tempted to use the Bible as a source.  That is okay IF you use it as the source of your background stories.  But please avoid a statement like, “Such and such MUST be true or false because the Bible says so.  After all, God wrote it.”  This statement is an example of circular reasoning.  Remember that CRTW is critical thinking class, and you need to subject your beliefs to careful scrutiny.

·         Your paper should be 8-10 pages plus a works cited page, and it should include 1-2 pages on the elements.  In other words, we will get your research paper out of the way by midterm so that you do not have it looming over you at semester's end.  That may seem counter-intuitive to you, but let me assure you:  this paranormal paper, though long and involved, is easier than papers three and four.  Thus it is the logical next step in our journey through CRTW 201.

 

 

 

Paper Three:  Thinking in a Discipline

 

Unlike the first two papers, paper three corresponds directly to a whole chapter in Nosich’s book.  Be sure that you read that chapter before proceeding.  Then follow the steps listed below, all of which are segments of the document that you must turn in.  This is NOT a paper about why you chose your major or why you like it.  Nor is it a paper primarily about nature vs. nurture.  It is a paper about whether the kind of thinking that people do in your major is right for you--and why.  By the time you reach your conclusion, you should be in a position to say either that you are majoring in the right subject or that you have discovered reasons to reconsider your choice of major.  Steps one through five will be worth 5 points; Step six will also be worth 5 points.  

 

General notes:

Step one (a few sentences):  Start with the assumption that you have chosen (or will choose) a major that fits the kind of thinking that you like and are good at.  Write down what your (prospective) major is and why you assume that it is right for you.  You should complete the following sentence:  "Thinking in [your major] is ________ thinking." 

 

Step two (1-2 pages):  Visit a class in your major (most likely one of your current classes) and put it (i.e., what happened in class on that single day) through the elements.  Do NOT analyze the overall course, just the material presented on a single class day. 

 

Note:  Do NOT pick a review session for your sample class.

 

Step three (1 page):  Follow up your visit with an interview of the professor who teaches the class.  Among the things that you should discuss are his/her insights on the elements as you have applied them to your class.  Your interview with him/her must be one of your sources.  This assignment falls within the advising period; therefore, you will need to make an appointment well in advance of when you need it.

 

Note:  DO NOT EXPECT THE PROFESSOR TO DO THE ELEMENTS FOR YOU!  Be sure to prepare questions for your professor about the nature of thinking in your shared discipline.  In include his/her answers in step three.  I will find it quite unsatisfactory if your step three says, "My professor agreed with my elements."  Record a substantive discussion.

 

Step four (1-2 pages):  Find a scholarly article in your major field and put it through the elements.  Turn in this article with your paper.  A key passage from this article = your focused topic; quote the passage in step six.

 

Note:  The professor of the class you visited should be able to recommend a great article; be sure to ask!  Look not for a description of your field (or a media story about something that happened in it) but for a journal article that shows a thinker doing the work of your discipline.  For example, if your major is English, do not find a source that sums up or defines New Historicism (a critical approach); instead find an article that uses New Historicism to analyze a literary text.  DO NOT PICK AN ARTICLE THAT DESCRIBES YOUR DISCIPLINE OR SPECULATES ABOUT ITS FUTURE.  PICK AN ARTICLE THAT SHOWS THE AUTHOR DOING THE WORK OF THE DISCIPLINE.  THE AUTHOR SHOULD NOT BE A JOURNALIST!  S/HE SHOULD BE A SCHOLAR IN YOUR FIELD!  PICK A SCHOLARLY ARTICLE IN YOUR FIELD OF STUDY!

 

Note:  An article of fewer than 5 full pages or one that lacks sources will not be acceptable.  Moreover, if your class is on Native Americans, find an article on Native Americans.  If your class is on World War II, find an article on World War II.  If your class is on Latin American history, find an article on Latin American history.  If your class is on spelling, find an article on spelling.  The article must relate to what the class discussed on the day of your visit.  This strategy will help unify the project.

 

Step five (1-2 pages):  Using the elements, analyze your whole discipline.  DO NOT DO RESEARCH IN THIS STEP!  YOUR ANALYSIS SHOULD BE YOUR OWN.

 

Note:  Nosich’s chapter includes examples of how to do this.  (If you are an earth science or an English major, you and I should talk about how to get around the fact that Nosich uses these disciplines as examples.)

 

Note:  The above steps go from specific to general.  It is important to follow this order because the steps build on each other.  Obviously, you should not leave all of these steps until the last minute.

 

Step six (4-6 pages):  Write a classical argument about your discoveries, using a passage from your article as the focused topic.  Write a thesis that responds to the following question:  Were you right in step one to assume that your major is right for you--and why?  As always, your thesis should follow the following format:  “Although…I will argue that…because….”   For example:  "Although [reason why you do not fit your major's thinking; in other words, some qualification of your thinking goes here], I will use a passage from [your article] to argue that [your major] is right for me because [of something about your thinking and your major's thinking]."  Be sure to mention the focused topic not only in your thesis but in ALL paragraphs of this paper!  Also be sure to quote a passage (half a page to a full page, double spaced) in the background section, NOT the argument section. 

 

Note:  Apply the elements to your focused topic in the background section.

 

Note:  Do not cut directly from the introduction to the quoted passage without a topic sentence.  Do not cut directly from the passage to the arguments.  Instead, devote a paragraph to discussing the passage in terms of the kind of thinking that it reflects and requires.  Then, in the argument section, you must give reasons why you are good at this type of thinking.

 

 

 

Paper Four:  Fukuyama

 

Now that we are almost all the way through Our Posthuman Future, it is time for you to write a paper in connection with Fukuyama’s thinking.  Your final paper also builds on paper three because you should (ideally) consider how someone in your major field would address a question at issue in PHF.

 

Note:  In a few cases, it may be impossible to make a connection between YOUR major and PHF.  For example, it is hard to imagine how interior design has much relation to Fukuyama's book.  If you find yourself facing a hopeless disconnection, try doing the following two things.  First, write your classical argument from the point of view of SOME discipline that relates to PHF (perhaps your minor if your major does not connect).  Second, make your problem your solution.  Address the fact that there seems to be an unbridgeable gulf between your major and anything that F talks about.  Then see if that leads you to some point about reading, thinking, and writing.  If you still cannot think of a connection, then turn to one of your INTERESTS and make a connection.  If THAT does not work, pick something that does not interest you but that will do the job.  YOU MUST HAVE A LENS THROUGH WHICH TO VIEW PHF AND ABOUT WHICH YOU CAN READ, THINK, AND WRITE CRITICALLY.  I EXPECT YOU TO CALL ATTENTION TO IT IN YOUR PAPER.  In other words, you need something in the "discipline" position in Figure 5.2 on page 178.

 

Step one (1-3 sentences):  Identify your topic and quote the sentence(s) in which it appears.  It should be something in Fukuyama’s book that relates to your discipline.  For example, if an English major were writing this paper, his/her topic might be Fukuyama’s use of Huxley’s Brave New World, a text often studied in literature courses.

 

Note:  As you work toward topic selection, it may help you to realize that the three sections of Fukuyama’s book correspond to science, philosophy, and politics.  Scanning the book's index may also help you to identify connections to your discipline.

 

Step two (1 sentence):  Identify a focused topic.  If an English major were writing this paper, his/her topic might be why Shakespeare is outlawed in Huxley’s brave new world.  A suitable focused topic might then be how Caliban--a particular Shakespeare character--helps us answer this question and, in turn, understand what Fukuyama is afraid of.

 

Note:  A focused topic is a specific example.  If you do not know the difference between that and a more general category, please come see me.  I expect you to write about your focused topic in every paragraph in Step 5 (the classical argument paper).

 

Step three (1-3 sentences):  Based on your work on paper three, write a brief statement about what it means to think in your major discipline.  If your discipline does not connect, see the "Note" above and do step three from a point of view other than a discipline (or whatever "lens" you select).

 

Step four (1-2 pages):  Find at least one outside source (a scholarly article or book chapter) that illuminates your focused topic.  Put your article through the elements (this is exactly what you did for paper 3).

 

Note:  The emphasis is on "scholarly."  Your article must have sources and must be at least five pages long.  Do not pick a short article written by a journalist.  For example, a newspaper article online is not appropriate.  Anything from about.com is not likely to be suitable either.  Ideally, your focused topic will NOT come FROM your article; however, it is okay to look for an article that relates to it.  For example, an English major might select an article that talks about Caliban as a Native American.  DO NOT ANALYZE A CHAPTER FROM PHF.

 

Note:  I do expect you to turn in your article with your paper. 

 

Note:  Use your article to support your arguments or objections.

 

Step five (4-6 pages):  Write a classical argument from the point of view of someone in your major field (or, if that is impossible, from whatever point of view that you have selected).  In your paper, support a controversial thesis about a focused topic and do so in one of four ways:  agree with Fukuyama, disagree with Fukuyama, do a little of both, or offer an idea that explains what he leaves unexplained.  Whichever approach you choose, be sure that your thesis reads, “Although…I will argue that…because….”  Make sure that the thesis statement includes and is about the focused topic and that it makes reference to F.  In the background section, lay out your focused topic:  describe it.  Then put your focused topic through the elements of critical thinking.  Be sure to underline and boldface the elements.  Obviously, argument, objection, and  reply will follow.  As always, I expect you to reflect on your thinking in the conclusion:  do so from the point of view that you selected in step three.  LABEL YOUR SECTIONS:  INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, ARGUMENTS, OBJECTIONS, REPLIES, CONCLUSION.

 

***Note:  Obviously, when you analyze your focused topic, you may not just repeat your analysis from step four.  That is why it is important to select your focused topic in step two, prior to your selection of a scholarly article.

 

Note:  You may need to tap additional sources for information on your focused topic.

 

Note:  The conclusion to your paper is NOT step six. 

 

Step six (1 page):  Reflect on what you have learned about Fukuyama and about yourself as a critical reader/thinker/writer as a result of preparing this paper and taking CRTW.  Some reference to your midterm assessment paper would be helpful here.

 

THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH REQUIRES THAT YOU TURN IN YOUR SEMESTER'S WORK (PAPERS ONE, TWO, THREE, and the self-assessment paper) FOR STORAGE.  YOU SHOULD INCLUDE THIS WORK IN YOUR FOLDER WHEN YOU SUBMIT PAPER FOUR.  However, do not turn in previously submitted articles.  Turning in photocopies of your papers is okay if you want to keep the originals.  Obviously, you will not get your materials back.  Please do not call or e-mail me with inquiries about your final course grade.  And please do not stop by my office to ask.

 

Further Details:

·         As in paper three, your document should be organized by section headings (e.g., Step One, Step Two, Step Three, etc.).  Steps one through four and six will be worth 5 points (1 point apiece); Step Five will be worth 5 points.

·         Be sure to turn in your outside source (your article or book chapter) in your folder, along with the paper and a fresh comment sheet.  You are also required to turn in your semester's work along with the fourth assignment.

·        Here is another way to think of this assignment:  You must first analyze a focused topic related to Fukuyama’s book in a way that someone in your field would recognize.  Then you must evaluate, from that same point of view, Fukuyama’s take on an issue illustrated by your focused topic.