Ashley Zhang Problem Set 1

.docx

School

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

210

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by DeaconElephant74

Ashley Zhang Problem Set 1 Sep 1, 2022 Worked with Sophie Burgess 1. Read the following logic chain and answer the questions: (15 points) “Unnecessary” regulations inhibit economic growth and opportunity Regulations on the internet (“Net Neutrality”) enable economic growth and opportunity Net Neutrality regulations are therefore not “unnecessary” 1. What type of reasoning is this? Deductive reasoning 1. Assuming the statements made are true, the conclusion is _________________. Net Neutrality regulations are therefore not “unnecessary”. 1. What is a problem with using this type of reasoning in public policy debates? The problem with using deductive reasoning in public policy debates is that it forms conclusions based on generalized premises, but it can be difficult to prove that the premises hold true under all conditions and circumstances in the real world. This means that the conclusions made through deductive reasoning could be based off inaccurate premises, which could potentially lead to misleading decisions and policy agendas. 2. True or False: Policy analysts should always recommend the most effective option to solving a problem. (5 points) False—different social problems prioritize different criteria, so other analytic methods, such as ethical considerations and cost-benefit analysis, may be weighed more heavily for certain issues.

3. Which of the following scientific standards generally poses the largest problem for policy research? (5 points) 1. Empiricism 2. Control 3. Objectivity 4. All of the above 4. In the context of this course, what is wrong with the following problem definitions? How might you rephrase them to make them appropriate for policy analysis? (10 points each) 1. Low-income people buy too much junk food with their SNAP (Food Stamp) benefits, leading to increased rates of obesity amongst recipients. The problem definition confuses the intermediate measure of buying too much junk food with the actual problem/outcome of increased obesity rates. Buying too much junk food is not a problem in and of itself, but the outcome of obesity that is associated with it is the actual issue. Potentially, the definition may be rephrased as “There is a high rate of obesity among SNAP benefit recipients.” If possible, including a specific numerical measure of obesity would help provide more context to the problem. 2. The arbitrary criminalization of marijuana in the U.S. unfairly results in too many people in prison. Firstly, “arbitrary” and “unfairly” are opinions regarding the criminalization of marijuana that indicates bias. While the argument that a problem exists is an opinion itself, the argument may be more convincing by remaining as objective as possible. Moreover, similar to the first problem definition, the intermediate measure of criminalizing marijuana is not necessarily bad. Rather, it is the outcome of having too many people in prison that acts as the real problem. The definition could be rephrased as “There are too many people in prison in the US.” This statement is also vague, so adding a statistic about the number or proportion of people in prison would be helpful.

3. Forcing private companies to serve same-sex couples violates their religious liberty. There may not be a specific problem indicated in the problem definition, as a violation of religious liberty is vague and unclear. Rather, introducing a reason or elaboration of why violating religious liberty is bad could provide some clarity. The statement could be rephrased as “Violations of religious liberties are unconstitutional.” 5. The U.S. Census Bureau determines an individual’s race through a series of two questions. The first question asks for race (e.g. “white”) and the second asks about ethnicity (e.g. “Hispanic”). Regardless of the answer to the first question, anybody who answers “Hispanic” on the second one is classified as “non-white”. As a recent Washington Post (Links to an external site.) article notes, “[S]ince 2013, the Census Bureau has declared a majority of babies born (Links to an external site.) in the United States are nonwhite — by counting all infants with any mixed origins as nonwhite. But this is only true under a “one-drop” rule (Links to an external site.) . National Center for Health Statistics data shows (Links to an external site.) that more than 50 percent of U.S. babies have a non-Hispanic white mother.” Give us at least two reasons this way of measuring race might impact public policy analysis (you can be creative, so long as it makes sense) and tell us what a better way to measure race would be. (20 points) One reason this way of measuring race might impact public policy analysis is that it may be difficult to identify the problem that minority groups face. This is because the “one-drop” rule dictates that anyone with any small traceable amount of minority ancestry is considered non-white, so it becomes difficult for policymakers and congressional committees to isolate the actual minority population in need and the specific agendas that would most benefit them. Another way this measure might impact public policy analysis is that the data may be skewed by overestimating the percentage of minority groups in the United States. This could result in spending excessive resources and time on passing legislation that would affect a smaller proportion of the population than expected. A better way to measure race could be by creating a survey with two distinct questions. The first question would concern race, which is purely based off biological and genetic characteristics. Since the “one-drop” rule can lead to inaccurate data collections on the US

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help