Page 1 of 5 #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Page 1
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone
Name: Janoye Richards
Date: 12/20/2023
Critical Thinking Final Touchstone
In this assignment, you will make two contrasting normative arguments about what one ought
to do. Both arguments will be about the same topic, and so at least one of the arguments is
likely to be something you don't actually agree with. You will compose the arguments in
standard form—that is, as a series of statements that end with your conclusion. Reminder: Do
not write as an essay!
Part I. Select your topic and arguments.
a. Choose a topic from the following list:
● Should people eat meat? ● Should seat belt wearing be
● Should marijuana be legal? mandatory?
● Should pet cats be kept indoors? ● Should children be required to take
● Should zoos exist? gym/PE classes?
● Should customers leave a tip in ● Should public roads be used for
a coffee shop? private car parking?
b. Write two logically contradictory normative conclusions for the topic. You do not need to
agree with both (or either!) conclusions, but you should be able to logically support both
of them.
The conclusions need not be phrased exactly the same as they are phrased in the topic
list, but they do need to be logically contradictory to one another. For example, if you
selected the topic "Should people eat meat?", your conclusions might be:
● People should not eat meat.
● People should eat meat.
But it would also be acceptable to choose:
● People should reduce their meat consumption.
● People need not reduce their meat consumption.
c. These conclusions will be the final line of your argument. If you revise a conclusion after
writing the argument, you should revise the conclusion here to match.
This study source was downloaded by 1827175 from cliffsnotes.com on 01-08-2026 18:22:51 GMT -06:00
Page 1 of 5 #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*() Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
https://www.cliffsnotes.com//study-notes/6787446
, Page 2 of 5 #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Page 2
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone
Conclusion #1: People should eat meat
Conclusion #2: People should not eat meat
Part II. Write your arguments in standard form.
a. Standard form is a series of numbered statements. Each should be one sentence long.
The final statement is the conclusion. You do not need to label statements as
premises or conclusions; it is understood by the form of the argument that all
statements are premises except the final one, which is always the conclusion.
b. There should be at least one normative statement (stating what people should do) and
at least one descriptive statement (describing something to be true). Statements that
predict outcomes or describe what people believe are not normative. A good way to
determine if a statement is normative is looking for verb phrases like “should,” “ought,” or
“have an obligation to.”
c. If any of your premises make factual statements that are not common knowledge and
widely accepted, include a source supporting your reference. This can be an APA
citation or just a link to a reputable website or publication. Here is a helpful resource for
APA references.
d. Place an asterisk (*) by the normative premise(s) that support the conclusion.
e. Do not use your conclusion as a premise. This is the fallacy of “begging the question.”
f. There may be a subargument within your argument, a conclusion reached by premises
that then becomes a conclusion that supports your premise. If there is a subargument,
underline the subconclusion.
g. The conclusion should be the final statement in your argument (as given above) and
begin with the word “therefore.” These should correspond to the conclusions from Part 1.
h. The complete argument (including conclusion) should be 5-7 statements.
Argument #1
1. Eating meat provides a large number of elements that are necessary
to complete a balanced diet.
2. All the enzymes required for proper digestion and absorption of meat
are produced by our bodies.
3. Many essential nutrients, such as Vitamin B12 and heme-iron, are
more readily available in meat than in plant-based foods.
4. Humans have been consuming meat for thousands of years,
indicating an evolutionary adaptation to a diet that includes meat.
5. Therefore, people should eat meat our bodies are designed to
consume and digest meat as part of a balanced diet.
This study source was downloaded by 1827175 from cliffsnotes.com on 01-08-2026 18:22:51 GMT -06:00
Page 2 of 5 #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*() Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
https://www.cliffsnotes.com//study-notes/6787446
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Page 1
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone
Name: Janoye Richards
Date: 12/20/2023
Critical Thinking Final Touchstone
In this assignment, you will make two contrasting normative arguments about what one ought
to do. Both arguments will be about the same topic, and so at least one of the arguments is
likely to be something you don't actually agree with. You will compose the arguments in
standard form—that is, as a series of statements that end with your conclusion. Reminder: Do
not write as an essay!
Part I. Select your topic and arguments.
a. Choose a topic from the following list:
● Should people eat meat? ● Should seat belt wearing be
● Should marijuana be legal? mandatory?
● Should pet cats be kept indoors? ● Should children be required to take
● Should zoos exist? gym/PE classes?
● Should customers leave a tip in ● Should public roads be used for
a coffee shop? private car parking?
b. Write two logically contradictory normative conclusions for the topic. You do not need to
agree with both (or either!) conclusions, but you should be able to logically support both
of them.
The conclusions need not be phrased exactly the same as they are phrased in the topic
list, but they do need to be logically contradictory to one another. For example, if you
selected the topic "Should people eat meat?", your conclusions might be:
● People should not eat meat.
● People should eat meat.
But it would also be acceptable to choose:
● People should reduce their meat consumption.
● People need not reduce their meat consumption.
c. These conclusions will be the final line of your argument. If you revise a conclusion after
writing the argument, you should revise the conclusion here to match.
This study source was downloaded by 1827175 from cliffsnotes.com on 01-08-2026 18:22:51 GMT -06:00
Page 1 of 5 #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*() Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
https://www.cliffsnotes.com//study-notes/6787446
, Page 2 of 5 #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Page 2
Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone
Conclusion #1: People should eat meat
Conclusion #2: People should not eat meat
Part II. Write your arguments in standard form.
a. Standard form is a series of numbered statements. Each should be one sentence long.
The final statement is the conclusion. You do not need to label statements as
premises or conclusions; it is understood by the form of the argument that all
statements are premises except the final one, which is always the conclusion.
b. There should be at least one normative statement (stating what people should do) and
at least one descriptive statement (describing something to be true). Statements that
predict outcomes or describe what people believe are not normative. A good way to
determine if a statement is normative is looking for verb phrases like “should,” “ought,” or
“have an obligation to.”
c. If any of your premises make factual statements that are not common knowledge and
widely accepted, include a source supporting your reference. This can be an APA
citation or just a link to a reputable website or publication. Here is a helpful resource for
APA references.
d. Place an asterisk (*) by the normative premise(s) that support the conclusion.
e. Do not use your conclusion as a premise. This is the fallacy of “begging the question.”
f. There may be a subargument within your argument, a conclusion reached by premises
that then becomes a conclusion that supports your premise. If there is a subargument,
underline the subconclusion.
g. The conclusion should be the final statement in your argument (as given above) and
begin with the word “therefore.” These should correspond to the conclusions from Part 1.
h. The complete argument (including conclusion) should be 5-7 statements.
Argument #1
1. Eating meat provides a large number of elements that are necessary
to complete a balanced diet.
2. All the enzymes required for proper digestion and absorption of meat
are produced by our bodies.
3. Many essential nutrients, such as Vitamin B12 and heme-iron, are
more readily available in meat than in plant-based foods.
4. Humans have been consuming meat for thousands of years,
indicating an evolutionary adaptation to a diet that includes meat.
5. Therefore, people should eat meat our bodies are designed to
consume and digest meat as part of a balanced diet.
This study source was downloaded by 1827175 from cliffsnotes.com on 01-08-2026 18:22:51 GMT -06:00
Page 2 of 5 #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*() Critical Thinking – Final Touchstone.pdf Critical
#$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
Thinking – Final Touchstone #$%$%$^$@**#&^#*&&%(%%^&*()
https://www.cliffsnotes.com//study-notes/6787446
