INSTRUCTIONS
Read the excerpt from the article below. Use the passage to answer the questions below. Your answers should be concise (100 words or less for each) and provide specific examples from the text to support your opinion.
QUESTIONS Explain which COUNTER ARGUMENT you feel best contradicts the introduction. Give at least two specific examples from the text that reflect your opinion.
lust Give Up, You Arc Never Going To Win
INTRODUCTION
With all the effort spent this last semester on how to properly debate a topic, it may seemll surprising to learn that it is almost completely impossible to win an argument. The ways in which we engage in debate have changed so much that most people, no matter how educated, are unwilling to consider factual information that goes against their own personal beliefs. This means that arguments are now decided by emotion far more often than by logic. The results of such are widespread. From small disputes between married couples that are never fully resolved to political decisions that have long-lasting consequences…
ARGUMENT 1
Modern technology is now being used to investigate what happens to our thoughts during debate. With advances in technology, several research firms are now able to map active areas of the brain during conversations using a machine called an FMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imager). The results have shed new light on how people respond to information they disagree with. Psychology professor. Drew Weston, led one of these studies in 2011 where researchers interviewed supporters of U.S. presidential candidates. Barak Obarna and Mitt Romney. They showed each participant a sit) of their favorite candidate contradicting himself. When the participant saw this, the part of the brain responsible for logic and reason (prefrontal cortex) showed very little activity. The areas of the brain, however, that are responsible for emotion, conflict-resolution, and moral judgement showed very strong levels of activity. This means that instead of deciding whether the information they heard was accurate, they focused on how the information made them feel and how to justify the information. Furthermore, when they could justify the information by something like, “Maybe the candidate just misspoke,” their brains released a chemical called dopamine which acted like a reward for resolving the conflict (Suzclaltsev, 2016). This process of justification can also be seen as a way to pacify the opposing side, especially when we are face to face with someone we care about such as a spouse or a friend…
