Critique the model that Prager “University” articulates in the video
“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkdbSxyXftc” based on the ideas (ecological and cognitive) we discussed in class during Unit 1 concept ” Nature provides the sustenance to support life” and
Unit 2 concept ” “Nature is in a balance that humans disrupt and otherwise would be in a balance like it’s supposed to be”.
Do not just offer a revised model. Explicitly articulate what specific parts of the model may be valid and how the information is mispackaged or misconstrued. Are there teleological or inappropriate universals? How are facts used in ways that intentionally universalize uncertainty for example? How to do concepts of resource limitations, change, disturbances, etc. inform a ‘debunk of the debunk’? What evidence contradicts the video’s specific claims?
