2steve
First news Article: IOS 17 (Talk about the bad in IOS 17 such as…
First news Article: IOS 17
(Talk about the bad in IOS 17 such as battery overheating, turning off randomly, etc.)
LINK: https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidphelan/2023/10/10/apple-iphone-15-pro-max-surprise-problem-reported/?sh=48e344173150
Summarize the article:
How is the issue outlined in the article an “ethical” dilemma – is it truly an ethical dilemma, or is it simply a dilemma? Note: the specific dilemma(s) and how this issue falls within the constraints of the dilemma.
What is the most important information in this article (i.e., what supporting evidence, facts, experience, or data do the authors provide to support their argument)?
What key concept(s) do we need to understand in this article (i.e., what important ideas do we need to understand to understand the authors’ line of reasoning)?
What main assumption(s) underly the author’s thinking (i.e., what is/are the author(s) taking for granted that might be questioned)?
If we take the author’s line of reasoning seriously, what are the implications (i.e., the “so what” – why does the argument matter? Why should be care? What consequences are likely to follow if people take the author’s line of reasoning seriously)?
What are your reactions to the argument? Are you convinced? Why or why not?
What questions do you have about this article? Do you need more information? Is part of the argument unclear? Is there something the author/authors hasn’t/haven’t considered? What would you ask the author(s) if you spoke to them?
How do the authors establish authority? (Think about whether the authors seem knowledgeable. Why or why not? What perspectives, biases, or values appear to have a role in the authors’ argument? Cite specific examples.)
The key concept(s) we need to understand in the article are: (What important ideas do you need to understand in order to understand the authors’ line of reasoning?)
How do the authors get your interest? (Think about whether the authors try to get you to identify with them or to care about the subject. Do the authors seem to assume you have particular interests and/or values and use them as the basis for argument? How? Cite specific examples.)
What are some possible contrasting perspectives to the dilemma outlined in this article?
Think back to question #1 in the “Writing Style” section. Based on the biases or values you identified, what contrasting view(s) do you need to find to get a contrasting perspective?
Second news Article:
Find an opposing viewpoint. find a story on the same topic from a media source that sits on the opposite side of the political spectrum from the initial argument.
(It has to have been posted within the last 30 days)
Second news article: Apple response about the IOS 17 problems
(You can include more information if article does not provide enough)
LINK: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/apple-iphone-15-overheating-bug-software-update-ios17/
Summarize the article:
How is the issue outlined in the article an “ethical” dilemma – is it truly an ethical dilemma, or is it simply a dilemma? Note: the specific dilemma(s) and how this issue falls within the constraints of the dilemma.
What is the most important information in this article (i.e., what supporting evidence, facts, experience, or data do the authors provide to support their argument)?
What key concept(s) do we need to understand in this article (i.e., what important ideas do we need to understand to understand the authors’ line of reasoning)?
What main assumption(s) underly the author’s thinking (i.e., what is/are the author(s) taking for granted that might be questioned)?
If we take the author’s line of reasoning seriously, what are the implications (i.e., the “so what” – why does the argument matter? Why should be care? What consequences are likely to follow if people take the author’s line of reasoning seriously)?
What are your reactions to the argument? Are you convinced? Why or why not?
What questions do you have about this article? Do you need more information? Is part of the argument unclear? Is there something the author/authors hasn’t/haven’t considered? What would you ask the author(s) if you spoke to them?
How do the authors establish authority? (Think about whether the authors seem knowledgeable. Why or why not? What perspectives, biases, or values appear to have a role in the authors’ argument? Cite specific examples.)
The key concept(s) we need to understand in the article are: (What important ideas do you need to understand in order to understand the authors’ line of reasoning?)
How do the authors get your interest? (Think about whether the authors try to get you to identify with them or to care about the subject. Do the authors seem to assume you have particular interests and/or values and use them as the basis for argument? How? Cite specific example
What are some possible contrasting perspectives to the dilemma outlined in this article?
Think back to question #1 in the “Writing Style” section. Based on the biases or values you identified, what contrasting view(s) do you need to find to get a contrasting perspective?
