Discuss the difference between complex and simple arguments and concepts of causation based on one′s ability to engage in systems thinking.

You are to write a paper on why you deserve an ‘A’ for your closing argument in the O.J. Simpson trial. Make your case based on how closely you followed the instructions, which in this case is the checklist: 1. State your name and which side you are representing. 2. Acknowledge and show appreciation for the jury, their service, attention, and patience. 3. State your theory of the case which is an overarching narrative of why the jury should believe your side. 4. Summarize the evidence you believe is most important to establish a guilty or not guilty verdict, be specific, give details. 5. Discredit the evidence of the other side, be specific, give details. 6. Do not over-rely on adjectives, and if you use strong words such as “murderer” or “wife-beater” or “racist”, only do so after you have provided strong evidence that it is deserved. 7. Finish with a specific request of the jury of what you want them to decide. 8. Thank the jury again, for doing their duty and for doing justice. In addition, make your case based on how effectively you have used the concepts of persuasion presented in my lectures: 1. The internal coherence versus correspondence styles of thinking 2. Jamie Whyte’s Crimes Against Logic (pragmatic vs. principled arguments, motive and authority fallacies, opinions, prejudice, empty words, and ‘shut up’) 3. The need to be compassionate and empathetic with people who stubbornly disagree with you 4. The difference between complex and simple arguments and concepts of causation based on one′s ability to engage in systems thinking 5. The use of propaganda (deliberate misinformation) to serve a hidden agenda rather than air honest differences 6. The use of stereotypes to short-circuit reasoning 7. The importance of understanding your audience′s emotional investment in holding their current beliefs