In my initial oral exam I combined both Glenn Beck and his co anchor's argument into one to better fit argument and doing so made it easier to form a structured idea of the fallacies involved using Toulmin’s model but also made identifying specifically Glenn’s fallacies difficult. Though it can be assumed that he agrees with the statements and analogies his co anchor was making as he used it as a jumping off point for his own final argument. Parts of the co-anchor's articulation are present in Glenn’s argument but in the exam I didn’t identify only Glenn’s ideas in the model. Specifically the grounds, warrant and backing were weakened as they were more closely related to his co anchor’s arguments than this own.
Identifying this error Beck’s argument based on the Toulmin Model (Foss 131-133) is as follows:
…show more content…
Finally Beck uses a straw man to find the weakest argument of his opponent and implies it to be an absurd and awful reasoning not taking into account any other points nor any other reasoning that might refute his statement.
Beck does not entertain the idea that while the argument he presented in opposition to anti abortion views, aborting a fetus conceived through rape because the fetus would share the rapists genes, could have other reasoning besides being from a eugenists point of view. He does not engage the understanding that while eugenists do actively trying to prevent the reproduction of people they believe to have undesirable traits not conducive to humanity through variety of awful tactics, the people who would reproduce are choosing to do so. He completely ignores the lack of choice and the violence associated with rape and that conception of a fetus was not the intent nor should carrying it be an outcome, especially not based upon the arguments he