Listening: Listening for Inference, Attitude, & Opinion (Advanced) C1 - Lesson 3: Critically Evaluating and Deconstructing Spoken Arguments from Any Source

C1 EVALUATION

Deconstructing Arguments

ការវាយតម្លៃ និងវិភាគអំណះអំណាង

🎙️ Context: A public debate on "AI in Education".
Dr. Aris (Pro-AI): Claims AI is essential for future survival.
Prof. Lydia (Skeptic): Claims AI destroys human connection.

A

Dr. Aris (The Technocrat)

Premise (Reason): Traditional methods are slow; AI is efficient.
Conclusion (Claim): We must adopt AI immediately.
Flaw: Assumes only two extreme outcomes exist.

L

Prof. Lydia (The Humanist)

Premise: AI lacks human empathy.
Conclusion: Using AI will destroy human character.
Flaw: Assumes a small step leads to a catastrophic disaster.

Map Dr. Aris's Argument:

Click the item that represents the CONCLUSION.

"Traditional teaching is obsolete." (Premise)

"We must adopt AI immediately." (Conclusion)

"AI provides personalized learning." (Evidence)

RESULT AREA

Identify the flaw in Prof. Lydia's argument:

Slippery Slope

Arguing that one small step (using AI) will inevitably lead to a disaster (generation of robots).

Ad Hominem

Attacking the opponent's character instead of their argument.

Red Herring

Distracting from the main issue with an irrelevant topic.

Task: Evaluate the strength of the evidence.

Both speakers used emotional manipulation. Write a 1-sentence critique pointing out the lack of objective data.