Logical fallacy is an error in reasoning that messes up an
argument. An example is like someone saying honey roasted peanuts are nasty,
therefore siracha peanuts are nasty too. But honey roasted and siracha peanuts
have two different flavors.
I researched an article saying Time
Magazine uses logical fallacies in the “technology hoax” page. The article in
Time Magazine says that the technology in this generation is hurting kids in
school and growing adults. They say that kids don’t learn well with technology
and adults are becoming addicted to video games.
The article says “Tech in the classroom not only
leads to worse educational outcomes for kids, which I will explain shortly, it
can also clinically hurt them.” There was a peer- review showing screen time increases
the risk of ADHD, aggression, depression, etc.
In my opinion, I think kids learn better with technology in
the classroom. I have experienced this in my last two years of high school when
the school board decided to fund our schools with three IPad carts and two
extra MacBook carts. I had the best experience with using the IPads because we
also get to interact with everyone in the room. An example is a website called Kahoot.
Throughout the whole article, AJ Juliani posted most of the
logical fallacies he found in the Time magazine article. AJ Juliani is a parent
and teacher which shows that he has more experience with kids learning with
technology more than Time magazine. He said the role of technology is going to
change for the better and I completely agree with him.
What's funny is that logical fallacies only mess up arguments if the other participants in the conversation acknowledge and refute the logical fallacy. Otherwise, the problem is that the fallacy becomes part of the lore and "truth" of a situation, regardless of the real "Truth."
ReplyDeleteIn paragraph 2, can you link to the Time Magazine article? Let's see specifics. What examples of proof does the article show? Is this one of those "gray spaces" articles that reflects a possible limited argument? What I mean by that is that technology can certainly interfere with learning and social growth. But it doesn't for all, right?
I think your argument is interesting when you bring in the anecdotal (personal) evidence.
In your last paragraph, is AJ Juliani the author of the site Kahoot? Can you contextualize this a bit more? Why should we trust him? Who is he?
I like the example you used in your first paragraph. I wish you would of hyper linked the article into your paragraph that would of made it easier to search it up myself. I agree with you, I feel like merging learning with technology does help people because it's not as boring compared to just reading from a book.
ReplyDelete