Sample 0The lecturer and the author of the article both agree that honesty is a virtue. They differ in opinion when it comes to the importance of that virtue in the grand scheme of things. The article claims that honesty must be maintained in every situation. The lecturer makes the counter argument that there are situations in which secrecy or even dishonesty are necessary for the greater good.First of all, while the article argues that “full disclosure” is the best operating principal, the lecturer gives several examples for why that is not the case. Governments cannot always be honest with their citizen and still protect their safety. Also, sometimes new friends should wait until they get to know each other before discussing their opinions on contentious issues.Secondly, the article’s author also makes the claim that lies are never acceptable, and that they can never be forgiven. The lecturer provides an example of a good time to lie. When a person’s feelings are at stake, as in the case of an insecure girlfriend or boyfriend, lying is often the nicest thing to do. In these cases, the lecturer argues, a lie will be more easily forgiven than cruel honesty.While neither party believes that honesty is unimportant, the lecturer contends that sometimes there are other issues at hand. Sometimes the ends justify the means.Sample 1The lecturer and the writer disagree on the merits of online education. The write believes that online education is detrimental; stating that organizational issues, lack of social interaction and limited oversight will lead to a less robust education. The lecturer feels that online education is a positive revolution which will improve regulation of student progress, enhance online communication skills, and more efficiently monitor cheating.The author believes that online course organization will differ greatly from traditional education. This will lead to problems in evaluation such as efficiently monitoring student progress, graduation rates, and student satisfaction among others. The lecturer counters this idea by claiming online courses actually provide more clear and defined tools to evaluate student progress and class engagement. The lecturer proceeds to attack another of the writer’s claims that online education limits in-person socialinteraction. Instead the lecturer believes online courses enhances the web savvy of students and encourages more modern forms of communication such as email and message boards.Lastly the writer claims that online courses allow for more dishonesty and cheating amongst students due to the inability to oversee homework and test. The lecturer disagrees and states that the internet actually controls cheaters by monitoring work environments more closely and forcing students to be more accountable. Overall the lecturer feels that online education provides many benefits to traditional education.Sample 2The lecturer and author disagree on the credibility of explorer Robert Peary’s expedition to the North Pole in 1909. The author claims that Peary was the first person to reach the North Pole based on verification of historical evidence provided by outside parties. The lecture sets out to discredit these institutions and paint Peary as a fame hungry liar.The author argues that the National Geographic Society checked the evidence of Peary’s journey and concluded that his claims were true. The lecturer attempts to discredit this conclusion by attacking the credibility of the society, claiming that they consisted of Peary’s supporters who had a vested interest in verifying the expedition. Though the author discusses photographic evidence of the expedition, the lecturer goes further in stating that Peary’s original photographs were never released for independent verification. In addition he attacks the low quality of the faded photos and the loss of the original camera in attributing to unverifiable claims.The author cites that in 2005 explorer Tom Avery took the same route as Peary using similar equipment in roughly the same amount of time. The lecturer argues that Avery took a much shorter route than Peary and had more favorable weather conditions. Overall the lecturer attack the credibility of the writer’s sources in order to disprove that Peary was the first man to the North Pole.Sample 3The author and lecturer disagree on the origin of Native American peoples, though both note that Native Americans believe they have always been in the Americas. The author uses archeological evidence in support of a European migration to America. The lecturer attempts to disprove the author by citing various logical fallacies and problems in the author’s arguments.The writer uses archeological evidence to support his claims. For example the author cites that spearheads excavated in the Americas resemble those of ancient European, rather than Asian, civilization. The lecturer attempts to discredit this by arguing that the similarity in appearance is a result of similar sized animals in the Americas and in Europe, rather than a common ancestry. Going further, the lecturer claims that the 13,000 years old skull found near Mexico City, despite its similarities with European skulls, is one small piece of evidence that is insufficient in supporting the author’s larger assumptions.Lastly the lecturer discredits the writer’s theo ry that sea migration occurred during ancient times, when Europe and America were geographically closer. Seafaring during that time had not yet been developed as evidenced by a lack of objects such as fishing nets. Therefore, the lecturer concludes that it would be impossible for Native Americans to have come from Europe. Instead the lecturer believes that a migration from Asia is more likely.Sample 4The author and lecturer agree that animals enjoy playing but disagree on why animals play. The author attempts to reason that animals like playing because it helps release excess energy, improve survival skills, and acts as a form of socialization. The lecturer does not provide his own opinion, but simply seeks to rebuff the author’s conclusions.The author claims that animals play in order to release excess energy and stay healthy. The lecturer states that animals do not play simply to release energy, citing that when animals wait for their mothers to take care of them, they have little energy yet they still play. The lecturer believes that this proves there is no correlation between play and energy level. The author makes another claim that playing helps animals improve survival skills by mimicking activities such as hunting and fighting. The lecturer discredits this by referring to an example in which two groups of cats,one that plays and the other that doesn’t, elicited the same skill level when hunting.Lastly the lecturer attacks the writer’s argument that animals play in order to make friends and socialize. The lecturer states that socializing occurs in animals in many ways, not just through play. Mice for example continue to socialize long after they pass the age of playing. The lecturer discredits the author’s evidence for why animals play.Sample 5The author and lecturer are debating about the privatization of government functions. The writer believes that privatization is beneficial because of increased funds, improved facilities, and new technology. The lecturer disagrees, stating that privatization will actually lead to higher costs, weaker infrastructure, and less investment in technology.The writer claims that the initial public sale and ongoing taxes paid by new private companies will raise money for the government. In addition it will streamline bureaucracy related to government companies and eventually pass these savings down to taxpayers. The lecturer attacks this by claiming that in the long term, profit-driven companies will have little incentive to keep prices low unless the government places limits on them. The lecturer also argues against the writer’s claim that privatization will lead to better facilities because of a desire to maintain reputation and avoid lawsuits. Instead, the lecturer states, because private companies cannot guarantee future contracts, infrastructure will suffer due to a focus on short term profits.Lastly the lecturer rails against privatization by claiming it will give a monopoly to certain companies. Instead of acting in the public’s interest, which is the writer’s claims, the companies will be beholden to the Board of Directors. This will keep them from making investments in technology and new services. Overall the lecturer argues against privatization because of its potential long term problems.Sample 6The author and lecturer argue the credibility of various explanations for the cause of the Little Ice Age starting in 1250 AD. The writer claims that the ice age was caused by melting icecaps, volcanic activity, andrepercussions from the Black Death. The lecturer focuses on the writer’s arguments and attacks their feasibility.The author states that melting glaciers prior to the ice age caused an influx of cold water into the global water circulation system, drastically dropping temperatures. The lecturer counters this argument by stating that the melting only occurred in Europe and North America, but that distant place such as New Zealand also had changes in temperature. The lecturer believes this confirms the melting was a local phenomenon and not a global one. Th e lecturer goes on to attack the writer’s claim that volcanic dust caused from increased activity during that time caused the ice age. The lecturer argues that this kind of temperature fluctuation could only result from worldwide eruptions which would leave significant records, of which there are none.Lastly the author claims that the Black Death killed many farmers, eventually turning farmland into forest, reducing carbon dioxide and reversing global warming. The lecturer believes this argument is impossible since the transfer of farmland to forest happens at a slow pace and could not justify such a marked fluctuation.Sample 7The writer and lecturer disagree on the repercussions of controlled burning in forestry management. The writer believes controlled burning has a negative impact because it harms wildlife, emits excess carbon dioxide, and wastes resources. The lecturer counters these arguments noting that wildlife is not harmed, carbon dioxide emissions are limited, and that controlled burning actually saves resources in the long run.The writer believes that burning kills wildlife, especially babies and weak animals that cannot flee the burn area. The lecturer does not agree, claiming that biologists are consulted beforehand to limit the impact on wildlife and save many animals, such as migrating birds. Secondly the writer argues that fires will increase carbon dioxide which will make it difficult for animals and humans to later return to burned areas. The lecturer argues that this is not true because many animals in the forest help accelerate the removal of carbon dioxide and quickly restore air quality to the region.Lastly the author makes the case that controlled burning wastes economic resources because it requires renting equipment and hiring laborers on a temporary basis. The lecturer makes the case that natural fires cause more damage and wastes more resources because they are unpredictable. As aresult controlled burning actually is a more efficient way to save money and use resources.Sample 8The writer and lecturer disagree on the underlying reasons that caused the demise of the Mayan civilization. The writer believes that a two hundred year drought in the 9th and 10th centuries is the best explanation due to scientific evidence, the coincidental end of the Mayan writing system and related incidents in the Amazon during that time. The lecturer disagrees and argues that drought was a common problem and that a civil war could be a better explanation for the Mayan descent.The writer believes that a drought during that time caused deforestation, soil erosion, and higher temperatures eventually making Mayan life unsustainable. The lecturer attacks this idea by noting that drought often take place throughout Mayan history, occurring approximately every two hundred years. The writer also claims that the demise of the Mayan writing system coincides with the drought and thereby supports the drought theory. The lecturer does not directly address this but instead goes on to consider that a civil war could be a better explanation due to hieroglyphic evidence that was left behind by the losing survivors.Lastly the lecturer argues that it is foolish to find correlation in the demise of the Mayan and Amazon civilization, which the writer attempts to do. The lecturer explains that the Mayans had better water storage system and better preventative measures for drought.Sample 9The lecturer and writer of the article disagree on the importance of sleep. The writer believes sleep serves a critical part in improving memory, renewing energy, and expelling negative substances. The lecturer believes the importance of sleep is exaggerated and uses examples to scrutinize the writer’s arguments.The writer believes sleep is important in helping consolidate memories, stating that a good sleep improves memory and performance the following day. The lecturer counters this argument by claiming that only a base level of sleep is necessary to memorize information, and in fact too much sleep can be detrimental because it causes drowsiness. The writer makes another claim that sleep replenishes energy through reducedsensory inputs and calorie intake. The lecturer disagrees and argues that medicine, caffeine, and energy drinks are more effective and practicalthan sleeping.Lastly the writer states that enzymes use sleeping periods to repair damaged brain cells and expel bad substances which accrue during highmetabolic activity while people are awake. The lecturer rails against this argument because its conclusions are based on studies of those withabnormal sleep deprivation. Therefore there can be no conclusion drawn for healthy normal individuals about the merits of sleep. The lecturerconcludes that though sleep is necessary, its merits are vastly overblown and unfounded.Sample 10The writer and lecturer disagree on the merits of music education inpublic schools. The writer feels that music education should be the parents’ responsibility, claiming it wastes important study time andtaxpayer money. The lecture feels music education is important because it leads to success in other areas, is a worthwhile expense, and encourages lifelong appreciation of music.The writer believes music education is a luxury and should be supportedprivately by parents and families. Time in elementary schools should be dedicated towards the study of more useful subjects such as math and reading. The lecturer disagrees, stating that music education is very beneficial and helps develop a child’s memory and concentration, thereby impacting reading and mathematical skills.The writer also claims that music education is a waste of money because it would better serve schools to spend funds on more critical things, such as building infrastructure and facilities. In addition the writer feels the investment isn’t worthwhile because many students will not become professional musicians. The lecturer disagrees by citing the cost effectiveness of buying instruments which can be used by many students over many years, rather than having one parent buy an instrument for one child. Lastly the lecturer argues that music education has long term benefits of increased creativity, lower drop out rates, and a lifelong interest in learning.。