Arguments

The question of “who get’s what, and how” is the guiding concern presented in the general argument of elitism vs. pluralism this week. The authors of the three key texts seem to each take a varying approach to answering this question, with some offering more extreme answers than others. On the most elitist extreme, Mills in The Power Elite (1956) provides a strong argument that the decisions made in politics are the direct result of the actions of a highly selective group of individuals who do

Euthanasia is “killing or passing up opportunities to save someone, out of concern for that person.” Arguments for euthanasia is the prevention of the unnecessary prolonging of suffering of the patient who is diagnosed with a terminal illness, and their families, also, there is the argument of using resources, economic and human, in efforts to keep people who have incurable diseases alive. Arguments against euthanasia is that the thought of having assisted suicide could be a result of misdiagnosis

Argument for Paying College Athletes Stephen Elting Mercy College Have you ever heard of a business that made billions of dollars, yet did not pay their employees? Seems pretty remarkable doesn’t it? Well this business is known as the NCAA. According to an article in the New York Times, the NCAA made $770 million from just the three-week Men’s Basketball Tournament, but how much did the athletes who participated in said tournament receive? If you said zero

In paragraph two the author has violated the relevancy criteria of a good argument by committing the fallacy of abusive ad hominem. In the second paragraph the author states “Those who say these embryos “would be discarded anyway” are wrong.” Fallacy of abusive ad hominem is defined as attacking the character of the opposing speaker rather than his thesis. In this statement the author is trying to reason by attacking the characteristic of his opposing speakers by stating that their thinking is wrong

fallacy? Well both, logic and fallacy almost mean the same thing or even relate to one another. According to quora.com, a fallacy is a pattern of reasoning that is always wrong. This is due to a flaw in the logical structure of the argument which renders the argument invalid. However, there are many fallacies out there but the three main ones. First, there is appeal to authority, Second, there is begging the question. Third, there is attacking the person. It is important for a student to understand

1. Logical Fallacy – It’s termed as the weakest form of argument, due to the little impact it has on the entire claim. However, it transits to the fallacy form when the claim and the evidence for the claim have some form of deficiency. Moreover, this fallacy can be both intentional or human error. The best method to identify these fallacies is to methodically analyze the entire passage and attempt to find the error. 2. Fallacy of Relevance – Fallacies of relevance are attempts to prove a conclusion

should flee his execution and how Socrates thinks on his arguments. The Global argument on Crito has two parts. The first half assumes fleeing is morally wrong and draws out the consequences of Socrates fleeing if the moral experts saw it as such. The second half follows up on the assumption that fleeing is morally wrong and that Socrates would be morally wrong if he was to flee. Crito pressed Socrates with a multitude of different arguments that he had hoped would convince him to flee his execution

1 The University Writing Center “Because writers need readers” Research Paper and Argument Topics Race and Ethnicity Gender and Sexuality Multiculturalism and Diversity Advertising and Marketing Economic Issues Environmental Issues Media Issues Consumerism and Convenience Culture TV and Film Sports and Entertainment Race and Ethnicity • • • • • • • • • • • Should racial profiling be a legitimate law enforcement policy in some areas? Should Affirmative Action for state university enrollment be continued

My honest thought on argumentation prior to starting this course were that argumentation was going to very easy. I simply thought that it would consist of arguing with someone back and forth trying to get my point across. But i was wrong, base off my pro/con speech and the few chapters that we have covered i've realized that argumentation is more complex than what i had expected it to be. There is different ways that someone can go about when state their claim using Rogerian argumentations style

argumentation, called the Toulmin Model. The Toulmin Model breaks down an argument into six parts: claims (what I hope to prove), evidence (support), warrant (connection between “claims” and “evidence), backing (support for the warrant), rebuttal (potential objection to the claim), and qualifier (limits put on the claim). The first three parts are the most important. The Toulmin Model is an actual structure that can be used in any argument, from academic essays to commercial advertisement. It can also be