Instructions: discuss a philosophical debate on which you can explain both sides promply. Maximum 2 pages.
The corruption in the entertainment business has been a controversial topic for many years but yet nobody seems to want to talk about it. It is as if it is a forbidden to talk about. But I believe that it is something that everyone should be aware of. For example, the death of the well known Anna Nicole Smith. She died on February 8, 2007 in the Hard Rock Hotel in California from a lethal cocktail of prescription drugs including chloral hydrate, methadone, sedatives, anti-depressants, anxiety drugs, longevity medications, B12, and growth hormones. All of this combined with a severe bacterial infection from the drugs being administered through the buttocks is believed to be the cause of her death. Was Anna killed or was it just an accident? Doing research has lead me to believe that it was no accident.
The majority of people that will answer any questions about her death will say that it was an accident. It could just be that Anna died from all of the medicine given to her combined with the drug use she was known for. She was known to be a major pill popper. You can watch her television show and even notice that she absolutely does drugs. But I believe that there is something more to the story. Anna Nicole was in the hospital giving birth to her daughter Daniellynn on September 7, 2006. A few days after the birth, her son Daniel decided to visit her in the maternity ward.
While visiting his mother three days after the birth of his sister, Daniel stayed the night in the hospital room along with his newborn sister, mother, and her handler/manager Howard Stern. He was found unconscious the next morning and was declared dead from a lethal cocktail including anti-depressants Zoloft and Lexapro, and methadone which caused Cardiac Disrythmia. This is severely close to the way his mother was found dead five months later. It is said to be a ritual sacrifice by the "Social Elite. " They took Anna and her son. Another example of this would be the death of Whitney Houston. The Night that Whitney died she was found in her hotel bathtub but very few people know that her daughter was found almost drowned in the same bathtub the night before. Was it coincidence? Or is all of this just a cover up?
P1. The "Social Elite" control the media.
P2. Nobody in the industry is safe.
P3. Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel died in similar ways.
C. The death of Anna Nicole Smith was not an accident. She was murdered along with her son.
The above argument is inductive, because the conclusion is based on probability and not certainty. For example, if all of my facts where to be proven it still does not mean one hundred percent that Anna Nicole Smith was murdered instead of dying accidentally and that the "Social Elite" had taken her life. Therefore my argument may not be cogent because cogency is based on strength and truth. In my premises above, P1 and P2 are a controversial topic, are very debatable and can possibly be proven false.
In conclusion, if my argument were to be cogent, it could later lead to the reasons of which many celebrities have died. This would inform the world that the group known as the "Social Elite" truly does exist and we would have a better understanding of why things happen the way they do in the Entertainment business.
Was Anna killed or was it just an accident? Doing research has lead me to believe that it was no accident. do not end paragraph here
. This is severelystrikingly close to the way his mother was found dead five months later.
For example, if all of my facts wherewere to be proven it still does not mean one hundred percent that Anna Nicole Smith was murdered instead of dying accidentally and that the "Social Elite" had taken her life.
You don't necessarily have to say "my argument" because the assignment appears to ask you to start a debate and discuss both sides without actually taking one, if I am understanding it correctly. So it might be a good idea not choose a side, despite your strong views on this topic you have chosen. That being said, maybe elaborate a bit more on how the people that do believe these stories just as they were reported could and often do view these matters as unfortunate accidents, overdoses, etc. You know what I mean? Supply fairly even amounts of discussion to support both sides so as to create a good debate. Also, whether or not you take my advice and try to be more neutral and objective, I feel you should shorten and strengthen the opening sentence and paragraph - it's a bit choppy. Try to organize both sides of the argument and your own thoughts a little more clearly.
Very interesting too, by the way. I like correcting essays that are fun to read. I hope this has been helpful. Good luck and have fun in school
