Running Head: CRITICAL AND CREATIVE THINKING 1 CONFLICT VIEW POINTS 2 Conflict Viewpoints Strayer University Willie Ramirez Professor Capers PHI210 October 24, 2015 Introduction Conflicts are differences or disagreements that when individuals have varying points of view that may be ideologically against each other. Conflicts occurrence always interfere with how individuals relate with each other. In order to ensure that conflicting parties find an amicable solution, a good conflict analysis strategy should be devised so that the conflicting individuals can come to terms with one another. A conflict solution strategy is always detailed; a mediator is required to have relevant and adequate information about the issue to which these conflicting individuals have disagreed on. It is always necessary that the mediator should avoid taking sides or being biased about specific issues so that he or she doesn’t disagree with the individuals to which he or she wishes to settle their conflict (Peter, 2006). Conflict analysis always requires a more detailed critical thinking by involving oneself in the process of trying to find the reasons to approve or disapprove certain views to which each of the conflicting parties raise. In this article different issues are described and brought to book according to the varying effects to which these conflicting viewpoints have to each other. It is very evident that a certain approved topic to which detailed ideologies to which individuals argue about are brought to a comprehensive scrutiny without biasing one individual’s point of view (Graff, 2003). Three important reasons for approving a certain ideology say an advantage or a disadvantage and gives further detailed reasons for either supporting or not supporting the proposed point of view. Each of the stated reasons is very important to be discussed and give premises that disapprove my own point of view about the ideologies stated. Several questions relating to ideologies proposed are to be answered in accordance to a detailed overview of what all these ideologies are about. These questions include; what is interesting about this view? What would I notice if I believed this view? In what sense or under what conditions might this idea be true? Logic is the form of reasoning or reflecting on a certain stated point conducted by an individual under the monitor of strict principles that aim at making these form of reasoning valid. The need or necessity of having good knowledge about a certain ideology to which an individual wants to reason-evaluate it is an important this reasoning than using inferential reasoning where an individual identifies the disadvantages of a certain issue and gives conclusions based on the disadvantages identified. Logical reasoning can expose a candid error in a certain individual argument; logi ...

1. Running Head: CRITICAL AND CREATIVE THINKING
1
CONFLICT VIEW POINTS
2
Conflict Viewpoints
Strayer University
Willie Ramirez
Professor Capers
PHI210
October 24, 2015
Introduction
Conflicts are differences or disagreements that when individuals
have varying points of view that may be ideologically against
each other. Conflicts occurrence always interfere with how
individuals relate with each other. In order to ensure that
conflicting parties find an amicable solution, a good conflict
analysis strategy should be devised so that the conflicting
individuals can come to terms with one another.
A conflict solution strategy is always detailed; a mediator is
required to have relevant and adequate information about the
issue to which these conflicting individuals have disagreed on.
It is always necessary that the mediator should avoid taking
sides or being biased about specific issues so that he or she
doesn’t disagree with the individuals to which he or she wishes
to settle their conflict (Peter, 2006). Conflict analysis always
requires a more detailed critical thinking by involving oneself
in the process of trying to find the reasons to approve or
disapprove certain views to which each of the conflicting
parties raise.

2. In this article different issues are described and brought to book
according to the varying effects to which these conflicting
viewpoints have to each other. It is very evident that a certain
approved topic to which detailed ideologies to which
individuals argue about are brought to a comprehensive scrutiny
without biasing one individual’s point of view (Graff, 2003).
Three important reasons for approving a certain ideology say an
advantage or a disadvantage and gives further detailed reasons
for either supporting or not supporting the proposed point of
view.
Each of the stated reasons is very important to be discussed and
give premises that disapprove my own point of view about the
ideologies stated. Several questions relating to ideologies
proposed are to be answered in accordance to a detailed
overview of what all these ideologies are about. These questions
include; what is interesting about this view? What would I
notice if I believed this view? In what sense or under what
conditions might this idea be true?
Logic is the form of reasoning or reflecting on a certain stated
point conducted by an individual under the monitor of strict
principles that aim at making these form of reasoning valid. The
need or necessity of having good knowledge about a certain
ideology to which an individual wants to reason-evaluate it is
an important this reasoning than using inferential reasoning
where an individual identifies the disadvantages of a certain
issue and gives conclusions based on the disadvantages
identified. Logical reasoning can expose a candid error in a
certain individual argument; logic reasoning is to some extent
undetailed since it can’t uncover an individual’s position about
a certain ideology in an argument (Tannen, 1998).
Logic can be used to fortify an argument for or against a certain
stated ideology or proposition, but this method of detailed
reasoning cannot be used to prove or disapprove this proposed
claim. An individual cannot substantiate that a certain opinion
is either right or wrong; it is because of this reason that an

3. individual will likely change his or her mind when another
individual identifies bad thinking in their arguments.
In many arguments individuals argue varyingly from each other,
their arguments are always based on certain ideologies to which
may either support be against another individuals position or
point of view. Individuals’ ideas are always supported by the
premises or reasons they give about their arguments, these
reasons include; people love to argue and disagree about certain
ideologies since they do it for fun in a friendly way (Peter,
2006). Other individuals seeing that they can justify their
propositions in an argument give up since they have no
important ideology to ascertain. The other reason why
individuals argue is because the ideology they propose and
support is seen by many as the best suitable about the issue they
are arguing about.
The above premises may be wrong or right depending on the
justification given by the individual suggesting it. Other
individuals may find a certain ideology right no matter how
hard they find it in giving reasons as to why they are supporting
the ideology. This rigidity of not supporting another
individual’s point of view describes how conservative the
unsupportive individuals are (Peter, 2006).
Individuals find fun in arguments, these individuals will stand
by their opinions despite since they are thrilled by how the
arguments fair on. The interesting thing about this premise is
that individuals fail to provide concrete ideas supporting their
point of view. What is notable if this view is believed is that an
individual will not be able to find the solution to the conflict
that inspired the argument (Graff, 2003)? There is no condition
under which the idea of arguing for fun may be justified as
being true.
Individuals who give up on arguments can’t give substantial
ideas to the point of view and therefore describes the
importance of providing detailed ideas before supporting a
certain ideology. An individual will never conclude his or her

4. argument and it is only advised to use this premise to justify the
ideas of a third party who is not majorly involved in an
argument (Tannen, 1998). The reason of individuals have bad
arguments based on the number of people supporting a certain
ideology is helpful in determining how the stated ideology can
influence peoples’ points of view about a certain issue. This
premise can be true only if the ideology being supported by
many people is justifiably correct and supportive in modeling an
argument.
Conclusion
As evidently described in these article individuals base their
arguments on certain beliefs to which they view as justified.
The relevance of these premises can be ascertained if these
premises or reasons enable an arguing party in argument to
consider other points of view and the importance these points
help shape up the whole argument. References
Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in Academe: How Schooling
Obscures the Life of the Mind. New Haven: Yale University
Publishers.
Peter, E. (2006). The Believing Game and How to Make
Conflicting Opinions More Fruitful . A chapter in Nurturing the
Peacemakers in Our Students: A Guide to Teaching Peace,, 13-
20.
Tannen, D. (1998). The Argument Culture: Moving From
Debate to Dialogue. Random House Publishers.
Assignment 1.2: Conflicting Viewpoints Essay – Part
IISynthesizingandWriting
Due Week 4 and worth 100 points

5. When looking for information about a particular issue, how
often do you try to resist biases toward your own point of view?
This assignment asks you to engage in this aspect of critical
thinking.
The assignment is divided into two (2) parts.
For Part I of the assignment (due Week 2), you read a book
excerpt about critical thinking processes, reviewed the
Procon.org Website in order to gather information, and engaged
in prewriting to examine your thoughts.
* Remember that in the Week 2 Discussion, you examined the
biases discussed in Chapter 2 of the webtext.
In Part II of the assignment (due Week 4), you will write a
paper to synthesize your ideas.
Part II – Writing
Write at three to four (3-4) page paper in which you:
1. State your position on the topic you selected for Assignment
1.1.
2. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org
website that support your position and explain why you
selected these specific reasons.
3. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the
three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org
website.
4. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely
experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your
position.
5. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group
identification that may have influenced your biases.
6. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has
changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your
position on the issue has stayed the same.
The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized
writing:
· Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph.
· Address main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence

6. and supporting sentences.
· Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation,
mechanics, and spelling.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
· Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size
12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references
must follow APA Style format. Check with your professor for
any additional instructions.
· Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the
student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the
date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in
the required assignment page length.
You must follow these submission guidelines:
· Submit the essay to Turnitin.com and then submit the
originality report and final essay with any needed revisions to
Blackboard.
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this
assignment are:
· Identify the informal fallacies, assumptions, and biases
involved in manipulative appeals and abuses of language.
· Create written work utilizing the concepts of critical thinking.
· Use technology and information resources to research issues in
critical thinking skills and informal logic.
Assignment 1: Personal Reflection Journal Entry
Due in Week 4 and worth 175 points
In this assignment, you will review your current level of
adjustment.
Write a one to two (1-2) page paper in which you:
1. Reflect on how well you are:
1.
a. adjusting to your life in terms of subjective well-being,
diversity, contexts, and / or thinking critically.

7. b. balancing your priorities, specifically with home, work,
school, recreation, and / or family.
c. developing your identity, specifically self-esteem, self-
concept, ethnicity, and / or gender.
d. coping with stress, specifically social support, multiple
coping strategies, and / or self-control.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
· Be typed, double-spaced, using Times New Roman font (size
12), with one-inch margins on all sides; Since the only
resources you will be using for this assignment are the article
and your textbook, you need not include a reference page.
Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
· Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the
student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the
date. The cover page is not included in the required assignment
page length.
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this
assignment are:
· Define psychology and psychological adjustment.
· Identify contextual variables (e.g., culture) that impact
psychological adjustment.
· Describe self-concept, self-esteem, and identity.
· Define stress, stressors, and coping strategies, and
contemplate their relationship to health and wellness.
· Use critical thinking skills to reflect on personal experiences
with adjustment and identify new strategies for personal growth.
· Use technology and information resources to research issues in
psychology.
· Write clearly and concisely about psychology using proper
writing mechanics.