This assignment is based on critical reasoning and the author is by Jerry Cederblom and David W. Paulsen.This book is the seventh edition.

We suggest that you review Units 1 through 5 of Study Guide I, then try to complete the assignment without the use of books or notes; as if it were a test. This strategy will help you to prepare for the final examination. However, once you have completed the assignment, review the course material and revise your answers as necessary before submitting it to your tutor for evaluation via the assignment drop box on the home page.

Instructions: Answer all questions. Most call for answers in the form of complete sentences or paragraphs. Your answers need not be long, but you should take care to write them as clearly, coherently, and accurately as possible.

Some questions have more than one part. Please be careful to read and follow the directions. If you are unclear about the meaning of any of the questions, consult your tutor.

1. Say what conclusion the author probably intends readers to draw, and evaluate the argument using three (3) of the methods you learned in Unit 3 (that is, identifying the form of the argument, thinking of another argument of the same form with obviously true premises and an obviously false conclusion, thinking of circumstances in which the premises of the argument could be true and the conclusion false, questioning the premises, and discussing whether the language used in the argument is unacceptably vague or ambiguous).

2. If there were "buffer zones" for wildlife protection around national parks, then it is possible that large mammals such as bears could have enough habitat to survive. But that is not so-we allow strip mining and every other type of development right outside of national parks, with no restrictions. The conclusion is obvious.