Mike Chavez Interview

Arguments can be made out of just about anything. An argument has two sides, and conveying an opinion is one of those two sides. Arguments sort out the views of others and the support of those arguments represented by those people from past events. These events let others show their argument about what will happen in the future, and of how the future carries on today. Newspaper articles can be arguments, and laws being passed in Congress have a form of argument associated with them. There are many types of arguments that are presented in many ways. In Everything’s an Argument by Andrea A. Lunsford and John J. Ruszkiewicz, information is given about three specific types of argument: forensic, deliberative, and ceremonial. Forensic arguments

Question No. 1: The urban governance official I interviewed is Mr. Joel Navarro, a third-generation Arizonan resident born and raised in Tempe and has lived in the Valley of the Sun most of his life. Navaro is a father of three children, Jillian, Parker, and Henley. He was first elected as a member of the Tempe City Council in Arizona in May 2008 and is today serving his second term after he was re-elected in March 2012. His current term will expire in 2016 ("Joel Navarro, Councilmember" Para 2-8).

Synopsis: This case is about a Walla Walla gang member, Eduardo Chavez, 17 who was convicted of raping a 15- year-old girl at his house last spring. He was sentenced to 7.5 years in prison. Chavez initially denied having sex with the girl or knowing anything about her but after he was confronted with the test results confirming that his DNA was found on the girl’s body he told the detective the sexual encounter was consensual. He maintained his innocence at court and spoke about emotional trauma he has encountered in his life, and vowed to change and get out

In assessing the argument, it can be said that it is a valid argument since the conclusions logically follow from the arguments given they are true.

The tool of argumentation has been used throughout the entirety of history. Arguing can occur in many different situations, yet most have a misconceived interpretation of what the term actually is. According to author Jay Heinrichs, an argument is properly defined as having the ability to “convince your opponent, or enemy, by changing his mood, his mind and his willingness to act” (Heinrichs, 15). Heinrichs also claims that to be able to master the art of arguing, one must be able to persuade anyone to do anything. In order to establish one 's standpoint on a position, one must possess a range of tools to be able to properly convince an audience. The two texts “Time 's Up For Title IX

An argument is a claim supported by reasons and pieces of evidence. Arguments have five primary attributes. Firstly, argumentation is a social process which involves two or more parties responding to one another’s proposal or claim. For the case of a written argument, the writer responds to the content of the essay through a critique process. The responses should not only involve restating the same claims and reasons but rather providing supportive pieces of evidence to the positions taken accordingly. Secondly, the aim of an argument is to make the audience adhere to the written critique. The objective is to influence the audience with the aim of gaining support to

Feldman begins the introduction of his inquiry by identifying the importance of argumentation in critical thinking and epistemology. He states, “Epistemology is the abstract study of knowledge and rationality. Critical thinking, as I understand it, is a kind of applied epistemology, the underlying idea being that thinking clearly and carefully about any issue requires understanding and applying some fundamental epistemological concepts” (Feldman 1). He goes further to describe arguments as “tools for helping us figure out what it is most reasonable to believe” (Feldman 2). A good argument is an earnest exchange between different parties that are trying to establish an agreeable conclusion. It is for this reason that agreeing to disagree is fallacious. In a debate, the sole purpose is to challenge ideas and claims in order to come to the paramount and most logical conclusion. The function of deliberation is

Argument is defined as a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong. An argument can be in written, spoken, and or visual form. In order to have a successful argument, it is important to have experience in the area because this will allow the audience to gain respect for the rhetor. Bryan Stevenson is a human rights lawyer who speaks up for criminal injustice. Stevenson opens up his speech with a sweet story involving his grandmother and a promise he made with her.

“I believe that today is the day you should know how I chose my career” and suddenly everyone's eyes and ears opened up. Mrs. Chavez had abandoned her normal playful tone and opted for a more serious one. I was wearing my red and white summer uniform. It was already about 20 degrees outside and as I gently rubbed my hands against each other, my palms started to sweat. I didn't know what to expect from the story as she began telling it. However, each word she said pulled me in closer and closer.

I chose Bernie sanders as the candidate that I would vote for. A couple of issues that I care about that Sanders also stands for are healthcare for all and same-sex marriage. Sanders position on everyone being able to have healthcare is supportive. In an interview with Ezra Klein of Vox, Sanders responded with, “Health care, to my mind, is a right of all people. That's what I believe. I think every man, woman, and child is entitled to health care”(1). He believes that healthcare should not be something that we have to qualify and fight for but that it should be our right to have good healthcare. He made a point by saying that despite having the affordable care act, we still have so many people that are still uninsured and underinsured while our country is paying almost double what any other nation faces (2). Sanders is for healthcare for all because he believes it’s our right to it despite our income and not be discriminated against for reasons such as our gender or previous health issues. He believes we shouldn’t be discriminated against just because we might have had a health issue that the insurance companies consider a higher risk of needing help later, which would mean

On the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr.Martin Luther King Jr, labor union organizer and civil rights leader Cesar Chavez writes to the magazine of a religious organization devoted to helping those in need, in order to persuade their conscientious readers that “only nonviolence will be able to achieve the goals of a civil rights activist”. Chavez establishes that violent tactics in a resistance are not effective for the cause by using juxtaposing diction in order to distinguish violent strategies and nonviolent strategies. Doing this allows him to elaborate on the later as his judgment as well as use of plural pronouns and rhetorical question drives his argument for nonviolent resistance.

Argument is persuading someone to come to your side or agree with your ideas. Because not everyone thinks about the same thing, writer are easily to convince their audience to come on board with their ideas. Writers persuade other people by using facts, reasons, and supporting details to support their position.

An argument is an attempt to prove that something is true (or probably true) by offering evidence. In philosophy there are usually three premises that are part of the argument. Premises are evidence used to attempt to prove the conclusion. The third premise is the one that sums up that argument. Arguments can be objectively true or subjectively true. For an argument, x is objectively true if and only if x is the case, and x is subjectively true for S if and only if x coheres with S’s worldview of X is simply a matter of taste.

My experience debating was very interesting in that we were debating about a topic that many of us can related to as college students (if universities are ethically obligated to allow for free speech on campus). At the same time, while we felt confident in our arguments as to why universities are ethically obligated to protect free speech on campus, we had to think about what arguing points the other team would bring up. It was important that we did not limit our reasoning to just our arguing points. This way, we were ready for our rebuttal without having to think on the spot. In the article, “The limit of reason”, it mentions that “Arguing, after all, is less about seeking truth than about overcoming opposing views.” By remembering that we

Argument is an ability that requires a person to have deep and elaborate thinking. The ideas or opinions supported by concrete and powerful thinking skills. Through argument, one convinces woes or passes information across different platforms. It helps in problem solving of various natures and delivery of ideas and passing opinions. It is through argument platforms that we learn high order thinkers and people who reason differently. It is a means by which we are able to solve issues ranging from answering questions, making judgements and drawing conclusions. The learning process in technology certainly requires critical thinking to help in analysis of in-depth issues and problems (Scott, 2009).