Ambiguity Analysis

The authors argue that when the nation uses the word “illegal immigrant”, the nation is framing immigrants as criminals. The authors begin by stating that the word illegal is a strong and unfair word because the people who are associated with the word illegal are criminals. This implies and frames all immigrants as criminals. Aside from this implication, the authors also demonstrate that the word illegal is unfair by placing the word illegal on other types of people. One example is that if a driver who got a speeding ticket were to be referred to as an “illegal driver” then that would be an extreme title just for a person who committed a minor offense (20). Another example is that if a businessman who didn’t pay his taxes on time were to be referred to as an “illegal businessmen” that would also be an extreme title just for a person who committed a minor offense (20). With these examples the authors make it clear why it is unfair for the nation to

The United States has long wrestled with questions over immigration policy, with heavy partisan rancor characterizing the nature of illegal immigration as a political issue. As a humanitarian, economical and sociological issue, illegal immigration is not only a pressing issue but one that can invoke highly charged and emotional reaction from both sides. This was amply demonstrated this past week when President Obama announced that the Department of Homeland Security would be granting 'deferred action' status to a category of illegal immigrants falling into a qualifying set of demographic conditions. According to Julia Preston & John H. Cushman Jr.'s 2012 New York Times article entitled "Obama to Permit Young Migrants to Remain in U.S," the President used his executive authority to limit the number of deportations committed upon illegal immigrants by easing the status of the youngest of these.

Thomas L. Friedman discusses a variety of topics in his article titled “Hillary, Jeb, Facebook and Disorder”. As a result, Friedman makes it very complicated to clearly address his thesis or his call to action. The numerous topics that Friedman describes is an example of a highly ineffective writing technique. A writer should make it clear to his audience what he/she will be talking about in their writing. Instead, Friedman leaves the reader in a muddled trance.

Given the statute is ambiguous, the court should have deferred to the IRS and left the decision in the agency’s hands on an ongoing basis because this agency deference approach: (1) provides the best resolution between textualist and purposivist ways of interpretation; (2) is the optimal choice from a cost-benefit standpoint because it is less costly to let agencies interpret statutes than both Courts and Congress; (3) best reflects the overarching principle of separation of powers; (4) ; (5) will not lead to the abuse of discretion due to the existence of ongoing checks including “hard look” review and reliance interest restriction.

Bowell, T. & Kemp, G., (2015;2014;). Critical thinking: A concise guide (Fourth ed.). New York; London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315772035

My interpretation of Critical Thinking has been challenged by the author of this passage by the dean of college arts and sciences of Santa Carla University author and narrator Peter A Facione. I have come to the conclusion that my initial thoughts of what critical thinking was way off. The author has the reader asking himself questions, and forming scenarios where we actually had to use critical thinking. I think this method of understanding is a great way to teach new readers. Right off the bat Facione has us questioning our initial thoughts. I have a feeling this technique is going to be one of our tools as we come to understand what exactly Critical Thinking is.

In order to critically analyze an issue, you need to be able to recognize which words or phrases are ambiguous and determine if you accept the author’s definition of them (Browne & Keeley, 2015). This will help you decide if you agree with the author’s conclusion.

Based on the use of language,the kinds of adjustments that I can make about is that the whole time while he was talking to Sonia, his actions towards her screamed out what social sciences call, the “horns effect.” A negative judgement about a person based off of your first impression of them. mick continues to talk to Sonya very pushy. And most of the time she listens silently. Which is a nonverbal cue that she doesn't want to talk to him or see him. His syntax is the workings of a jerk. For instance telling the waiter “Hey, honey, bring me a cup of this, would ya?” Also by saying hey baby, don't forget about that coffee. Nother judgment about Nick is that he has poor listening skills. Sonya tells him more than once that she would like to be

8. What are the primary specialties of both the left and right hemisphere of our brain?

While DACA provides a way for the undocumented population to function in society without the fear of deportation, there are certain risks for applicants seeking protection under DACA. DACA is not an amnesty program and each applicant or case is assessed to ensure that qualifications are met and no security threats are posed. While DACA provides applicants employment authorizations, student loan programs and drivers license it does not however provide lawful status. Nor does it allow undocumented immigrants access to current health care reforms or access to federal aid making affordable and accessible health care a concern (Pérez Huber, 2015). A bigger critique of the DACA policy is the disclosure of an immigrant’s private information to customs and immigration officials. Many non-citizens are faced with the decision of continuing to live in the shadows of society or risk their information being shared, all with the hopes of being allowed to temporarily remain on U.S soil. Promising security by compromising and violating it at the same time is a social injustice and infringement of security and safety of an already vulnerable population. Another threat to undocumented applicants of DACA is the possibility of the policy changing with the change of administration. With President Barack Obama on his way out of the White House, the few privileges of DACA are now no longer guaranteed. With the new President-elect Donald Trump this fear is now a legitimate threat to the applicants of DACA. This concern has prompted universities like CSU Stanislaus to address their stance via open letters addressing the potential threats to undocumented students and assuring the campus will remain a sanctuary and safe place for all students regardless of immigration status. Not long after these same sentiments were expressed by UC President Janet Napolitano in a public letter to President-elect Donald Trump ( The Signal,

Organizational transformations are challenging, even under the best of circumstances. During times of uncertainty, people are hungry for information and leadership. When these things are not provided, associates become agitated and disengaged in their roles. One of the toughest tasks is to maintain employee peace, engagement, and motivation in the midst of uncertainty created by wide scale organizational change. Preventing conflicts is all about communication and without information and communication, people assume the worst and react based on that.

This paper is designed on a reflection study on my ability to be a critical thinker. A upcoming assignment had led myself to analyse previous work to obtain the best grade for the future work. With a new employment opportunity on the horizon, I knew the skills of a critical thinker would be paramount. I decided that I need to learn more about the subject. I have continued to research this topic over the last few months, and demonstrated it in the last coursework. I knew a starting point was needed, to address my critical analysis skills, and therefore starting back at the basics, would help achieve my goal.

This week’s reading assignment fittingly focused on critical thinking beyond the assigned text, and course. It expressed the type of critical thinker you can become is completely dependent on your beliefs and willingness to abandon them to go outside your own realm of comfort. It also expresses the belief that although you should go outside our comfort zone, there is still a requirement to learn new words and established facts and ideas. This course began with assignments which allowed us to learn the structure of argument but as we’ve progressed it has become less about the rigid structure but critical thinking and analysis. We have examined news articles, research articles, and popular television programs to see while the rules of arguments and critical thinking are all around us if we allow ourselves to be open to it. I plan to continue using the tools from this course and allow myself to be opened to different situations and persons to observe how both good arguments are made and critical thinkers arrive at their decisions.

The purpose of her article is to convince the readers of her own interpretation on political views. For instance, she asks questions such as “Who is telling the Tea Partiers and Trump voters to empathize with the rest of us?” and “Why is it all one way?” The author voices her personal opinions making statements like “Sorry,

Mary Douglas argues in her novel Implicit Meanings: selected essays in anthropology, that all cultures have concepts within their religions that describe the pure and the impure in opposition to one another. The ideology surrounding purity and danger is an argument based in anthropological theories that talk about how these ideologies are developed. One of these ideologies is found in the beliefs and practices developed within the Karam surrounding the animal the cassowary. The cassowary is a wild flightless bird that lays eggs and walks on two legs. Therefore the cassowary it is an animal in its very own category and therefore deemed sacred, as there is a different attitude within the Karam towards this flightless bird and other animals and birds alike. There are very specific rules that the Karam has surrounding killing and hunting a cassowary that make it sacred, such as a purification practice that must occur after a hunter kills the Cassowary so they are not deemed impure. There is also a very specific way of killing the Cassowary, which is to use the butt end of the spear. Each of these specific beliefs and practices surrounding this animal are what makes it sacred, due to the repetitive process in which the Karam completes them. The Koran holds the situation of the cassowary to be self evident, which relates to the ideology of Peter Berger in reference to the nomos and the cosmos.