The Hot Button Essay assignment is designed to challenge you to examine your beliefs more closely and with an eye to critical thinking skills. So often, research has shown, we have emotional attachments to our points of view, so much so that we are prone to accept facts and evidence ONLY if they support our previous opinions. This makes the path (or paths) to the “truth” difficult to locate and negotiate. Nicholoas Kristof (2009), editorial writer for the New York Times asks, “So how do we discipline our brains to be more openminded, more honest, more empirical? A start is to reach out to moderates on the other side — ideally eating meals with them, for that breaks down “us vs. them” battle lines that seem embedded in us. (In ancient times we divided into tribes; today, into political parties.) The Web site www.civilpolitics.org (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. is an attempt to build this intuitive appreciation for the other side’s morality, even if it’s not our morality.” He goes on to quote Professor Haidt, who argues, “Minds are very hard things to open, and the best way to open the mind is through the heart. . . Our minds were not designed by evolution to discover the truth; they were designed to play social games.” Kristof further suggests, “A corollary is that the most potent way to win over opponents is to accept that they have legitimate concerns, for that triggers an instinct to reciprocate.” Follow the directions for this assignment carefully. Do not assume you must experience a change of mind or heart or that your grade will have anything to do with your opinions. Demonstrate you have worked within the framework of the assignment and sincerely embraced the process. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Please use the following organizational structure and headings: WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW FOR DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS. Introduction: This introduction section (1 paragraph) should include a summary of the topic and an explanation as to why it is controversial. Write to a general audience. It should include your position on the topic BEFORE you did your research and analysis. Include your thesis statement. Opposing Arguments: This section (35 paragraphs) should introduce, summarize, and paraphrase the oppositions’ main claims and the evidence that supports those claims. This should be written in an objective tone and with an eye to accuracy. Represent the opposition fairly. Use critical thinking and set aside your own biases. Who are the persons, institutions, agencies, etc. who support this position? What are their main arguments and how do they support these? Each paragraph needs to be cited properly. Do NOT rely too much on direct quotations. Analysis: This section (35 paragraphs) is your chance to evaluate each of the opposing arguments presented in your references. Review logical fallacies and the material on critical thinking in your text, and then discuss where the opposition may have it right and where they may have it wrong. Use your critical thinking skills to evaluate and synthesize your references. What, if any, are the presuppositions of this position? Assumptions? Propaganda? Distortions of “truth”? Logical fallacies?? What “vested interest” might these persons, institutions, agencies have in supporting their agenda? What is your reaction to the facts, data, premises, and assumptions? Conclusion: In this section (12 paragraphs), please describe any changes that have occurred in your position, however minor and in either direction. Perhaps you are MORE convinced than ever of the validity of your views. Maybe, your eyes have been opened or your mind changed. How has evaluating the oppositions’ views affected your own? You will not be evaluated based upon your opinions, but how well you demonstrate critical thinking and how well you support your view and apply your understanding of logical fallacies. References: