Self-study
Journalist: It is unethical for journalists to lie—to say something untrue with the purpose of deceiving the listener—to get a story. ████████ ███████████ ████████ ████████ ████████ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ██ ██████ ███ ████████████ ████ █████ ████ █████ ████ ██████ ██ ███████████ █████████ ███ █████████ ██████████ ████████ ████ ████████ █████ ██ █████████ ███ ███████████ ███████ ███████ ██ ███████ █ █████ ██████ ███ ████████ ███████████ ████ █████ ██ █████████ ███████ ██ ████████ ██████████ █ █████ ███████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The journalist implicitly concludes that some people’s argument— that journalists are acting unethically when they withhold information to elicit new information because this practice is like lying— should be rejected. She supports this by saying that this argument overlooks the distinction between not preventing a false belief and actively encouraging a false belief, and that lying is unethical for the latter reason.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The journalist counters others’ argument by highlighting a key difference between lying and withholding information. She argues that this distinction invalidates their comparison and thus also invalidates their conclusion.
14.
The journalist argues by
a
pointing out a ██████████ ███████ ███ ███ █████ █████ ████████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ████ █ ██████████ █████ ██ █████ ████████████ ██████ ███ ██ █████
The journalist points out a difference between the two cases being compared: lying actively encourages a false belief, while withholding information simply doesn’t prevent a false belief. She uses this to show that a conclusion based on the cases’ similarities shouldn't be drawn.
b
defending what the ██████████ █████████ █ █████████████ ███████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ██ █ █████ ████████ ██ ██
The journalist’s conclusion isn’t about defending the distinction between lying and withholding information. Instead, she uses this distinction to counter others’ argument. Also, she never claims that the distinction is controversial, nor does she offer an example of it.
c
defining a concept ███ ████ ███████ ████ █████ ████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ███████ ██ ███ ██ ███ █████ █████ ██████████
The journalist defines lying, but she claims that lying does not apply to all the cases under discussion. Specifically, it doesn’t apply to journalists who withhold information in interviews in order to elicit new information.
d
appealing to a ██████████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███████ █████████ ████ ████████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████ ██ ██████
The journalist does refute an argument, but she doesn’t do so by appealing to a counterexample to undermine the ethical principle of lying. She accepts that it’s unethical for journalists to lie to get a story; she just disagrees that withholding information is like lying.
e
clarifying and defending █ █████ █████████ ██ █████████ █ ████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ██ █████ ██ ████ ███ █████
The journalist compares a case in which the moral principle of lying applies (journalists lying to get a story) to one in which it doesn’t apply (journalists withholding information). However, she doesn’t do so to defend the moral principle, but to undermine others’ argument.