Time To Assert American Values Summary

No matter how hard one tries, a person cannot debate a proven fact. Often times, the use of facts in literature can create a strong, compelling argument. In “Rough Justice: A Caning in Singapore Stirs Up a Fierce Debate about Crime and Punishment” by Alejandro Reyes, the author uses statistics, logic, and facts to build his argument supporting Singapore’s justice system that focuses on “a sense of personal responsibility” (Reyes 182). Unlike “Rough Justice,” the editorial, “Time to Assert American Values,” lacks logic but still attempts to convince readers of going against Singapore’s caning policy. After carefully analyzing the two texts, the reader realizes that the article “Rough Justice” is the most relevant and sufficient argument because of the author’s use rhetorical appeals and

When analyzing “Time to Assert American Values,” readers notice many illogical fallacies presented throughout the editorial. One of the author’s most recurring fallacies is his use of ad populum. Instead of focusing on the topic at hand, the author shifts focus to American patriotism and history. For instance, the author claims that “Americans need to remember that this country was also founded by dissidents” (“Time to Assert American Values” 179). In contrast to the New York Times editorial, the author of “Rough Justice” develops thorough, complete arguments. The arguments and claims presented in “Rough Justice” are not just briefly explained. Instead, the author develops and conveys his message consistently throughout the whole passage, avoiding any illogical claims or fallacies. For example, the author constantly reiterates how “‘In Britain and in America, they keep very strongly to the presumption of innocence’” (Reyes 182). By being persistent and and reiterating his message, Alejandro Reyes avoids the use of illogical