Day 59/67 of GED in Five Months, elements of an argument, and elements of a molecule

We use words every day, which many have different meanings in different contexts.  Pros, cons, and rebuttals are elements of a basic argumentative essay, while hydrogen and helium are basic chemical elements.  Language is important, and shouldn’t it be?

Today’s reading starts looking at one of the basic tools of understanding the world around us:

“The Periodic table characterizes the known elements in increasing order of atomic number. It starts on the top right hand corner with Hydrogen and continue from left to right which then repeats in the horizontal row below the last element. This is not just a list of elements it is organized in very different ways like properties and atomic mass. At first glance the periodic table may seem disorganized with only a couple elements on the top row and a block on the last row but it is very specific in the way that they are organized.”

 Week 16/18
Day 59 Lesson Plan, Week 16
Grammar: individual help to finish essay
Math: review linear inequalities
Science: Elements of life
Please see the Lesson plan for Day 59’s Exit Tickets

Action Items:  

1.) If you found a mistake, typo, or other concern with the web page you were reading, how would you find out who to contact in order to raise that concern?

2.) Please tell us where your information for your essay comes from, how you know that the sources are reliable, and who funded them,

3.) Write a book, story, blog post or tweet that uses your essay idea, and then, please tell us about it! If you write a book, once it is published please consider donating a copy to your local public library.

4.)  Feel free to answer the exit ticket questions in the comments, or pose any other questions you may have about the lesson, if you wish.

Dear Readers, ideas on learning, especially multiple #LanguageLearning, on-going education and empathy-building, to #EndPoverty, #EndHomelessness,  #EndMoneyBail & achieve freedom for All HumanKind

Support our key #PublicDomainInfrastructure  &  for heavens sake: please #StopSmoking for CCOVID-19 (or even for good!)!:
1. #PublicLibraries,
2. #ProBono legal aid and Education,
3. #UniversalHealthCare, and
4. good #publictransport
Read, Write -one can add Stayed on Freedom’s Call via this GoodReads button:

Yassas,   γεια σας!    Salût !  Nos vemos!  Görüşürüz!     ! שָׁלוֹם


January, 2021 CE = January 12021 HE

(Day 58Day 60)

Creative Commons License
Shira Destinie Jones by ShiraDest is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

16 thoughts on “Day 59/67 of GED in Five Months, elements of an argument, and elements of a molecule

  1. A thought I have been ruminating on lately: do you think the teaching focus on elements of argument runs counter to teaching active listening skills? On the one hand, understanding the elements of argument is important for critical reading and thinking. On the other hand, I recall so much focus during my school days on argument and counter-argument, listening to win an argument vs. listening to understand. Building persuasive argument is a valuable skill (more valuable than shutting down those that disagree with you, I would say) but does it inadvertently teach listening to build an argument vs. listening to understand?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hmmm, interesting question, very interesting. I was tempted to say yes, given Covey’s rule of “seek first to understand,” but then I recalled a time, 5 years ago, now, when I needed to get buy in from at least one of three people, all of whom were opposed to my intention. I knew that none of them understood, nor wanted to understand, my point of view. So, I used the most logical parts of my perspective to build a short but air-tight argument based only on the logical reasons for my intention. And it worked. Predictably, my two emotional opponents remained opposed, but the one who was more logical (and imho also quite likely to have Aspergers, luckily for me) grasped and admited to not being able to find fault with my argument, finally telling the other two that I was actually right (which was possibly the one and only time I heard that from any of this bunch), allowing me to go ahead with what I needed to do.
      I said all of that to say that even when one is listening only in order to shut down someone else’s argument, a well-constructed argument will still withstand the onslaught. That is not to say that it will win, because inevitably, when one is listening only to destroy, even logical will not win. So, I’d say that teaching logic has the advantage of not being dependent on understanding the needs or emotion behind the argument, although understanding those needs is still absolutely important, because without that empathy, as we see, no rational argument will win, any way. People simply do not listen to logic if they do not want to understand, so I think that teaching the one is very akin to teaching to other. But you are right, it is a problem, because if I had not understood the way that my Asperger’s opponent thought, in general, I’d not been able to get that needed buy-in. So listening to understand is a skill that should also be taught explicitly along with listening to find holes in an argument. And listening to find holes in an argument must be taught as listening to find the best solution to a problem for all concerned parties, not just listening to win. But we will never get past listening to win while our society thinks in terms of win-or-lose.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I love your long thoughtful response here! I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with your last point about the win-lose mentality. If we all had a win-win mentality centered around finding best solutions, there would be no issue with building arguments and listening for understanding. But when we have a win-lose mentality and operate with the mindset of winning against another person, the listening to win an argument becomes an obstacle, I think.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Thank you, JYP, and

          Exactly: the binary way of thinking is the problem (as Kosh says -“Understanding is a three-edged sword…”).

          We have got to get people to understand how important it is to imagine that there might be another valid way of looking at things, even if it is at odds with their most cherished beliefs. Problem is that when they stake their very existence on those beliefs, and the value of their existence, to them, is higher than anything else, it is hard to get them to care about anyone else’s way of feeling, seeing or thinking. I think that the fear of being minimalized/marginalized and then abandonned to die alone is what actually motivates alot of this win-lose mentality. We have a society that currently discards alot of people, and it’s hard not to want to be one of the discards, right? So when the stakes of losing are so damned high, it’s really hard to change that mentality. This is why I believe it is so important to provide a basic safety net for absolutely everyone, to allow everyone to let go of that fear of not having… enough/something/anything…
          Only then can we think straight and reason like human beings rather than like frightened animals.

          Liked by 1 person

Please Share your Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s