Cdae 002 Jensen's Critical Thinking Assignment

XXXXXXXXX                                                                Assignment 1: Critical Thinking

CDAE 002                                                                                        4 February 2015

Spin is most commonly associated with the media’s interpretation of policy decisions, but it can be found in any type of media regarding pretty much anything. The purpose is to use manipulative language in order to change someone’s opinion or stance on a topic. This is seen through Derrick Jensen’s article “Forget Shorter Showers” where he uses misuses statistics, makes faulty analogies, uses testimonial and uses virtue words to persuade the audience that the key to saving the earth is not living simplistically, but “destroying industrial economy that is the real, physical world” (Jensen, 2009).  The propaganda Jensen uses creates a biased and ill-supported argument that is not based on facts.

        Jensen’s argument is that personal solutions, such as reducing your individual waste, are irrelevant to saving the earth.  He leads the audience to believe that the only chance to save the planet is through activism aimed at taking down the systems abusing the environment. His bold statements imply that living simplistically “as a political act” doesn’t have a positive enough effect on global warming to be worthwhile (Jensen, 2009).

        The evidence Jensen presents is questionable at best. The first piece of evidence is the “scientific consensus that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide [to affect the global warming rate]” (Jensen, 2009). Firstly, who are these scientists? They are not referenced at all or given an affiliation with any kind of scientific institute. Secondly, where did they draw this conclusion? What type of data was used to calculate the ’75 percent’ claim? None of that is included, making the evidence hard to believe. The second piece of evidence found on page two states, “More than 90 percent of the water used by humans is used by agriculture and industry” (Jensen, 2009). This evidence has the same problems as the last piece: no source and lack of any indication this claim was based off of real, checked facts. The third piece, “municipal waste accounts for only three percent of total waste production in the United States” (Jensen, 2009). Identical to the other statistics, this one has no source or explanation behind where the numbers came from. Jensen’s intent was probably to shock the audience with these numbers, and it is probably effective, until people consider that this information could be false.

        Although the evidence’s factuality is questionable, it all seems to be consistent with the argument. Jensen is convincing the audience that reducing their waste is useless and isn’t enough to actually help the planet. These numbers presented in the article do a good job of supporting this claim.

        These percentages are also a propaganda technique that Jensen uses. The misuse of statistics is when no information about the data is included, such as the sample size or the source (Leonard, 1999). This can lead to the inappropriate use of numbers to support an idea.