The explanations are in good length, and the arguments includes the “to-what-effect.” The analysis demonstrates close-up reading by the
In conclusion, both of these examples strongly support the main idea
The titles I enjoyed most in the past year that were required included "How to Read Literature Like a Professor" by Thomas Foster, which analyzed how to go beyond the surface of literature. "Mythology: Timeless Tales of Gods and Heroes" by Edith Hamilton condensed the majority of mythology into one piece, aiding in the identification of allusions in other works that I have read. Another piece I surprisingly enjoyed to read was the piece "Everything's an Argument" by Andrea Lunsford, which explained the different fundamental pieces of arguments and how an effective argument is developed. I enjoyed these three readings the most during the past year because they went beyond the usual school reading assignment. Each of these provide a new tool
This is about presenting multiple examples to build a case in which the authors make a statement about the examples. One example of the authors doing this is ‘“free range” childhood became less common in the 1980s. ”(Lukianoff & Haidt, 2015, p.49). The authors here have given a statement, but then continue to back it up, “The surge in crime from the ’60s through the early ’90s made Baby Boomer parents more protective than their own parents had been. Stories of abducted children appeared more frequently in the news, and in 1984, images of them began showing up on milk cartons.
Mr. Schwartz feeds his audience numerous broad generalizations, or sweeping statements. The issue with sweeping statements is that
”1 This statement is just an assumption the writer makes in order to sway the readers to agree with is opinion. In order to verify this assumption the writer should provide some type of facts rather than his
In the scholarly journal “Brave New World: How Test-Optional Policies Could (And Should) Change College Admissions,” written by William C. Hiss and Valerie W. Franks, Hiss and Franks concluded that students who do not send test scores to institutions tend to perform just as well as student’s that send test scores. Hiss and Franks shares their research from a total of 37,000 students from public and private institutions that were accepted to college without sending any test scores. These students were then studied closely by their high school grade point average (GPA), cumulative college GPA, and standardized test scores. The end results explained that there was a very small difference between submitters and non-submitters. Standardized test
Within the Ted Talk, “For Argument’s Sake,” Daniel H. Cohen does an effective job at proving his claim that arguments are thought of as war-like situations with winner and losers instead of as an opportunity to gain knowledge. For example, Cohen states, “But the war metaphor, the war paradigm or model for thinking about arguments, has, I think, deforming effects on how we argue . . . It magnifies the us-versus them aspect of it” (TedTalk). In this assertion, he does a prominent job at explaining that the common thought of an argument is a battle in which one side wins which proves his point. The speaker continues to support his statement by expressing this idea: “Think about that one -- have you ever entered an argument thinking, ‘Let's see
However, the authors’ use of extreme examples hinder their argument
In order to support his argument, George J. Sanchez uses many examples to discuss the
The South was firmly against the admission of California as a free state. Its main fear was the upset of power balance, as Calhoun contended, “the Senate, the last bastion of balance, would be stacked against the South by the end of the decade.” In addition, Meade argued that “[the slaveholding South] needed room to expand,” and that “California was ideal for slavery.” Despite their best efforts, the southerners’ arguments didn’t do much because of the fundamental gap between the North and the South on the issue of slavery; it was nearly impossible for one side to convince the other. In the end, Stephen Douglas put through the admission of California by “getting some men to miss a crucial vote and others to vote with the other side.”
Furthermore, the type of examples Kluger, Aciman, and Steinmetz utilize involve strong data and facts to support their piece and make it more convincing. To illustrate, they describe, “ Just since 2004, the share of Americans who identify themselves as optimists has plummeted from 79% to 50%, according to a new Time poll. Meanwhile, more than 20% of us will suffer from a mood disorder at some point in our lifetimes and more than 30% from an anxiety disorder. By the time we 're 18 years old, 11% of us have been diagnosed with depression” (Kluger, Aciman, and Steinmetz 2). Given that their audience consists of more educated, well-read people, this evidence is particularly useful due to the fact it contains numbers and data that prove the writer 's’ main point and persuade their readers.
This short document is composed of sequential arguments, each one logically leading to the next, all containing distinct justifications with well-thought-out conclusions. The document itself is written to address statements
Beatty understands the way the world works in retrospect to the events leading up to the current situation of their government. As a fireman you must know what you are doing and how it benefits your society. Beatty explains the reason that books are banned to Montag, and doing so helps us understand the most important factor in the story. You must not offend anyone whatsoever. To maintain peace you must cease from reading or writing anything that could slightly be taken out of context.
