WGU D265 Task 1 | Passed on First Attempt |Latest Update with
Complete Solution
Choose one of the case studies from the Case Study list in Supporting
Documents. Read the case study carefully.
Then, complete the evaluation of the case study by filling out the template
below. You will write your response to each item in the blank box
underneath each section.
For more information on each item below, you can review the Learning
Resource sections referenced in each section.
No more than 30% of your written response can match other sources.
Please provide the labeled premise(s) and conclusion
of an argument from your selected case study below.
Premise(s) and
Conclusion
Review Section 1, Lesson 2 in the course for help with
this task aspect.
From Case Study #1 (Healthcare case), Daniel proposes that the
patient’s treatment should shift from a physician-prescribed
cholinesterase inhibitor regimen to a sound-therapy device. The
argument can be broken into numbered propositions:
1. Online forum claims: Daniel searched an online health forum and
found stories from caregivers claiming that exposure to certain sound
frequencies improves memory retention.
2. Personal anecdote: He recalls that his grandmother seemed sharper
after listening to classical music.
3. Influencer endorsement: A wellness influencer recently promoted a
sound-therapy device that emits “healing Frequencies,” and many of the
influencer’s followers have purchased the device.
4. Normative premise: Nurses should be willing to try anything that
might help a patient.
5. Intermediate conclusion: Because of the forum claims, his personal
anecdote, and the influencer’s endorsement, it is plausible that a sound-
therapy device might help the patient.
6. Conclusion: Since sound therapy might help and nurses should try
, anything that might help, Daniel concludes that they must buy and use
the sound therapy device for the patients.
These propositions are mapped in the argument diagram (see the figure
in the “Map” section). Propositions 1-3 jointly support the intermediate
conclusion (5). The normative premise (4) and the intermediate
conclusion (5) together support the main conclusion (6).
In the box below, please describe whether the
argument is deductive or inductive.
Deductive/
Inductive
Review Section 1, Lesson 4 in the course for help with
this task aspect.
Daniel’s argument is inductive, not deductive. The premises consist of
anecdotes and popular endorsements that, at best, suggest the
conclusion is plausible rather than guaranteeing it. Even if all the
premises were true, it would still be possible for the conclusion to be false
– the device might not help the patient at all. Inductive arguments are
evaluated on a spectrum of strength rather than validity.
In the box below, please describe the soundness of the
argument.
For a deductive argument, explain whether it is valid or
invalid.
Validity/
Strength
For an inductive comment, explain whether it is strong
or weak.
Review Section 1, Lesson 4 in the course for help with
this task aspect.
This inductive argument is weak. It relies on anecdotal evidence and
claims from unvetted sources. Daniel uses a general belief that
“mainstream treatments never work” to dismiss peer-reviewed medical
advice. The online forum stories and his grandmother’s experience are
isolated examples from which no reliable generalization can be drawn.
Appeals to a wellness influencer and the number of people buying a
product reflect popularity rather than scientific evidence; research has
Complete Solution
Choose one of the case studies from the Case Study list in Supporting
Documents. Read the case study carefully.
Then, complete the evaluation of the case study by filling out the template
below. You will write your response to each item in the blank box
underneath each section.
For more information on each item below, you can review the Learning
Resource sections referenced in each section.
No more than 30% of your written response can match other sources.
Please provide the labeled premise(s) and conclusion
of an argument from your selected case study below.
Premise(s) and
Conclusion
Review Section 1, Lesson 2 in the course for help with
this task aspect.
From Case Study #1 (Healthcare case), Daniel proposes that the
patient’s treatment should shift from a physician-prescribed
cholinesterase inhibitor regimen to a sound-therapy device. The
argument can be broken into numbered propositions:
1. Online forum claims: Daniel searched an online health forum and
found stories from caregivers claiming that exposure to certain sound
frequencies improves memory retention.
2. Personal anecdote: He recalls that his grandmother seemed sharper
after listening to classical music.
3. Influencer endorsement: A wellness influencer recently promoted a
sound-therapy device that emits “healing Frequencies,” and many of the
influencer’s followers have purchased the device.
4. Normative premise: Nurses should be willing to try anything that
might help a patient.
5. Intermediate conclusion: Because of the forum claims, his personal
anecdote, and the influencer’s endorsement, it is plausible that a sound-
therapy device might help the patient.
6. Conclusion: Since sound therapy might help and nurses should try
, anything that might help, Daniel concludes that they must buy and use
the sound therapy device for the patients.
These propositions are mapped in the argument diagram (see the figure
in the “Map” section). Propositions 1-3 jointly support the intermediate
conclusion (5). The normative premise (4) and the intermediate
conclusion (5) together support the main conclusion (6).
In the box below, please describe whether the
argument is deductive or inductive.
Deductive/
Inductive
Review Section 1, Lesson 4 in the course for help with
this task aspect.
Daniel’s argument is inductive, not deductive. The premises consist of
anecdotes and popular endorsements that, at best, suggest the
conclusion is plausible rather than guaranteeing it. Even if all the
premises were true, it would still be possible for the conclusion to be false
– the device might not help the patient at all. Inductive arguments are
evaluated on a spectrum of strength rather than validity.
In the box below, please describe the soundness of the
argument.
For a deductive argument, explain whether it is valid or
invalid.
Validity/
Strength
For an inductive comment, explain whether it is strong
or weak.
Review Section 1, Lesson 4 in the course for help with
this task aspect.
This inductive argument is weak. It relies on anecdotal evidence and
claims from unvetted sources. Daniel uses a general belief that
“mainstream treatments never work” to dismiss peer-reviewed medical
advice. The online forum stories and his grandmother’s experience are
isolated examples from which no reliable generalization can be drawn.
Appeals to a wellness influencer and the number of people buying a
product reflect popularity rather than scientific evidence; research has
