What role do sources play in validating an argument? Are we able to rely on the internet to provide complete and truthful information? Of course not, but how do we discern? How do we determine the motives of the people we're reading? One thing we have learned is that the people screaming most loudly about dishonesty are the ones being most dishonest. That isn't by accident. So, what do you do? And how does that apply to this week's content?

Incomplete question. However, I answered from a general research perspective.

Explanation:

What role do sources play in validating an argument?

Well, the term source basically refers to the originator of any information. We have sources that are considered credible sources (like Encyclopedia, Journal Magazine, Newspaper, etc) and others that are considered incredible sources (general social media post). Knowing the kind of source could thus help validate an argument.

Relying on the internet to provide complete and truthful information is difficult considering the amount of fake news available today.

there are so many examples for that in different areas, like biology experiment carried out in our lab recently.

here's one link :

an important city to the south and the region's capital is c. kiev