1. Writing 1 and Writing 2—January 13, 2016 Journal #7: What do you think about ghosts or aliens or other supernatural occurrences? Do you believe in them? Why or why not?

2. PRO/CON: Is Snowden a hero or a traitor? 1 st Reading: Look for answers to the following questions, and be prepared to share your responses after reading. – Who is Snowden? – What is he being accused of according to the article?

3. Argumentative Essay Prompt: Is Snowden a hero or a traitor? In making your argument, use evidence from the texts and discussion from the Philosophical Chairs activity to support your claims.

4. Who is Edward Snowden? Snowden is a former NSA contractor who leaked information, via the Internet, to the world that his agency (NSA) what collecting information regarding specific individuals and organizations, both political and personal. Some feel it was an act of heroism; others think Snowden betrayed his country and is a traitor.

5. PRO/CON: Is Snowden a hero or a traitor? 2 nd Reading: Reread the article with a partner, and answer the following questions: PRO: Paragraph 1: In the opening paragraph, Mark Weisbrot states, "Edward Snowden is a courageous American hero and will be remembered as one long after the 'war on terror' is replaced by some other pretext for violating Americans' constitutional rights and the rest of the world's national sovereignty, privacy and, sometimes, security." Why does Mr. Weisbrot place the words war on terror in quotation marks? What does the author mean by "some other pretext for violating Americans' constitutional rights..."? Paragraph 3: Who is the author referring to when stating "critical reporting"? What is the argument to support the NSA's actions according to this paragraph? Paragraphs 5-11: According to the author, the NSA is identifying and investigating individuals or groups associated with terrorism. In paragraph 6, the author states, "However, there is a mountain of evidence that this massive data-gathering is in fact being used against citizens who are involved in constitutionally protected activity, such as political organizing and public education." Reading through paragraph 11, give examples of some of the ways the NSA is abusing its power according to the author. Paragraphs 14 and 15: What entity is the author implicating in the 14th and 15th paragraphs as an authority with more power than our president and elected officials? Why does the author think this a concern? What is the significance of sharing this information? CON: Paragraphs 3 and 4: How does the example of the Aussies and the Indonesian intelligence services help support the author's claim that Snowden did more harm than good? Paragraphs 6 and 7: What did you learn about nations ranked at the top of the "Index of Freedom in the World"? According to the author, Jay Carafano, how did Snowden cause more damage to the nations ranked at the top of the Freedom House? Why is this important for his argument? Paragraph 10: What does the author mean by "ordered liberty"? Why is this significant to his argument? Paragraphs 12 - 15: What analogy does the author use regarding Snowden and his actions?

6. Prepare for Philosophical Chairs Which author, Mark Weisbrot or James Jay Carafano, presented the strongest evidence regarding the Edward Snowden controversy, and which arguments specifically convinced you of his innocence or guilt? Be sure you understand the central statement or topic before the discussion begins. Decide which section you will sit in. Listen carefully when others speak and seek to understand their arguments even if you don’t agree. Wait for the mediator to recognize you before you speak; only one person speaks at a time. You must first summarize briefly the previous speaker’s argument before you make your response. If you have spoken for your side, you must wait until three other people on your side speak before you speak again. Be sure that when you speak, you address the ideas, not the person stating them. Keep an open mind and move to the other side or the undecided section if you feel that someone made a good argument or your opinion is swayed. Support the mediator by maintaining order and helping the discussion to progress.

7. Philosophical Chairs Report/Evaluation Topic: Which author, Mark Weisbrot or James Jay Carafano, presented the strongest evidence regarding the Edward Snowden controversy, and which arguments specifically convinced you of his innocence or guilt? 1. My original position: Weisbrot or Carafano 2. How many times did I change my seat? 3. My ending position: Weisbrot or Carafano 4. How open-minded was I as I listened to other people talk? – Mostly open-minded – Partially open-minded – Not very open-minded 5. Explain why your position did or did not change and the reasons for your thinking. 6. Answer the following questions: – A. What was the most frustrating part about today’s discussion? – B. What was the most successful part? – C. What statements led you to change your seat or to remain sitting in your original position? – D. What conclusions can you draw about how you form your beliefs based on today’s discussion? – E. What would you change about your participation in today’s activity? Do you wish you had said something that you did not? Did you think about changing seats but didn’t? Explain.

8. Philosophical Chairs Reflection Directions: Provide a written reflection of the philosophical discussion you heard in class. Be sure you include the following in your reflection points in your reflection: the statement that was discussed--Which author, Mark Weisbrot or James Jay Carafano, presented the strongest evidence regarding the Edward Snowden controversy, and which arguments specifically convinced you of his innocence or guilt? the arguments for the statement the arguments against the statement your position and the reasons for this position whether or not you changed your mind during the discussion, which arguments swayed your thinking, and why.