Before start writing, please read the attached Argumentation chapter, it provides a lot of information you need for this assignment. And I also attached some sample essays in case you want to read them as references.Also, to help you getting started, Here is the link that includes 400 topics:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/learning/lesson-plans/401-prompts-for-argumentative-writing.html (Links to an external site.) You can select one that you are interested or you can write whatever you are good at.Here is the criteria:English 1101: Essay 6: Argumentation 10% IntroductionThe student establishes the importance of the issue in his/her opening paragraph. The essay uses an anecdote or some research to illustrate the gravity of the controversy surrounding his/her chosen subject. The introduction insists on the need to redefine the issue.15% ThesisThe thesis offers a surprising solution to the subject, promising to put it in a new light. It establishes clearly what side of the issue the author will take.15% AudienceThe essay clearly defines the audience that would disagree with the author’s position. It acknowledges that group’s beliefs without ridiculing or dismissing. The essay demonstrates a desire to persuade the audience to change its beliefs.15% Organization and DevelopmentOn a paragraph by paragraph basis the essay makes the thesis persuasive by making points that appeal to readers’ sense of logic rather than appeals grounded in ethos or pathos. The essay avoids argumentative fallacies such as circular reasoning, ad hominem attacks, etc.15% Research 2 SourcesThe essay incorporates information from reputable studies, experts, and/or existing debate on the subject to illustrate the main points of the thesis. The research is quoted in MLA style and the final page of the paper is a Works Cited page.10% ConclusionThe student has incorporated a clear conclusion that goes beyond simply summarizing the topic to include the potential implications of their analysis.10% Punctuation/GrammarThe student has followed punctuation and grammar rules throughout the paper.Â The student has also paid attention to accuracy in spelling and the overall formatting of the paper.10% ImprovementThe essay shows signs of concerted effort on student’s part to correct grammar errors from previous assignments and to demonstrate improvement over the course of the semester.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
In this chapter you will
analyze the elements of logic and
write appeals as part of an argument
identify the strategies for developing
a debatable position and writing a
identify a topic and write your own
analyze student argumentation essays
analyze arguments on a topic:
perspectives on immigrants in America
analyze arguments on a topic:
perspectives on the death penalty
explore argumentation in the world
analyze additional argument writing
An argumentation paper attempts to strengthen or change an attitude of the reader, or to persuade the
reader to a particular point of view or
to take some action. Although writers
of argumentation papers may use emotional appeals, they place their principal faith in appealing to the intellects of
Argumentation has probably too often appeared in the combative context
of a courtroom or debating society: right
and wrong confront each other; one side
wins, and one side loses. The victors
gloat over the demolished points of their
opponents or graciously accept their opponents concessions of defeat and apologies for being so wrong. Many writers
still do strive for total victory of this
sort, of course, but argument also can
be a matter of bringing opposing parties together, of showing the strengths
and weaknesses of all points of view,
of building consensus among former
enemies. Argumentation can involve
making peace as much as waging war.
Induction is the process of reasoning from the particular to the general. It is the
process of arriving at a general conclusion about all the members of a group or
class. Induction is a useful tool because it isnt always practical or possible to check
every member of a group before drawing your conclusion. If, for example, youve
noticed that for three Fridays in a row, Professor Hadley has given a pop quiz, you
may draw the useful conclusion that Professor Hadley is likely to give pop quizzes
on Fridays. You dont have to wait until the end of the term to see if youre right.
But induction is useful only if the conclusion about a group is drawn from a
fair sampling of that group. Whats fair depends on the group. You neednt stick
your hand into twenty fires to conclude that fire burns; one or two fires will do.
You should sample other groups more broadly. You should draw conclusions
about groups of people, for example, from a large representative sampling and
even then you should usually qualify statements with words like tend, may, are
likely, and so on. (See Hasty Generalization and Overgeneralization, later in
this chapter; see also Chapter 9, Example.)
Deduction is the process of reasoning from the general to the particular.
You apply a generalization already establishedby yourself or by someone
elseto a specific case. Deduction, like induction, is a useful tool. Youve
concluded, for example, that Professor Hadley is likely to give pop quizzes
on Fridays. As a result, you think twice about cutting Fridays class. Youve
applied your generalization (Fridays are likely days for quizzes) to a specific
case (this Friday) and just may have assured yourself a passing grade in Professor Hadleys class.
In its simplest form, the deductive process is stated as a syllogism: an argument
consisting of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.
Major premise: Fridays are likely days for pop quizzes.
Minor premise: Today is Friday.
Therefore, today is a likely day for a pop quiz.
Perhaps a more sophisticated example is the syllogism implicit in the Declaration of Independence:
Major premise: Rulers who violate basic human rights should be overthrown.
Minor premise: King George III has violated basic human rights.
Therefore, King George III should be overthrown.
Syllogisms rarely appear in writing or conversation in their pure three-part
form. It is far more common to find enthymemes, condensed syllogisms in which
one or more parts are missing, the writer assuming that the missing parts are
clearly understood and dont need to be stated directly.
Its Friday, so Id better go to Professor Hadleys class. (Missing premise:
Fridays are likely days for quizzes in Professor Hadleys class.)
CHAPTER 15 Argumentation
I hate movies with violence, and this movie is teeming with violence. (Missing
conclusion: Therefore, I hate this movie.)
Syllogisms are worth serious study primarily because they enable readers and
writers to examine the often unstated, and sometimes shaky, assumptions behind otherwise convincing arguments.
For a valid syllogism, both premises must be true. Its hard to imagine
a syllogism that begins with the premise The earth is flat leading to any
valid conclusion. But even if both premises are true, the reasoning process
itself may be faulty and the conclusion invalid. Consider the following
Major premise: English majors read lots of books.
Minor premise: David reads lots of books.
Therefore, David is an English major.
Despite the true premises, the conclusion still doesnt follow. The major premise merely says, English majors read lots of books; it says nothing about other
people who may also read books. Logically, David may be an English major,
but he may also be a merchant marine or a grocery store clerk who loves books.
The logical structure of the argument makes no more sense than this syllogism:
grass is green; her hat is green; therefore, her hat is grass.
Using Induction and Deduction
Induction and deduction are not mutually exclusive. You will seldom engage
in one kind of thought without using the other. When you use induction, you
usually have a hunch about what generalization the facts will add up to. If you
didnt, you wouldnt have a guideline for handling the facts. Consider, for example, that observation about Professor Hadleys quiz-giving tendency. If
you hadnt already suspected that Hadley was a Friday quiz-giver, you might
not have noticed that the pop quizzes did occur on Friday. Some deduction,
therefore, was involved in the process of reaching the generalization about pop
quizzes on Friday.
Similarly, in deductive reasoning you must also use induction. To ensure
sound premises, you must be sure that your evidence is both adequate and
fair, and that involves induction. Induction is important, too, when you present
your material. Even if yours is the best of syllogisms, you probably wont convince a reader of its worth unless you offer support for itreasons, statistics,
facts, opinions of authorities, examples. In the Declaration of Independence,
for example, Thomas Jefferson supported his case against George III by citing
twenty-eight instances in which the king had violated basic human rights. The
instances came from induction.
Avoiding Logical Fallacies
Whether your primary tool is induction or deduction, you need to make certain
that the evidence you offer isnt based on errors in logic. In other words, you
should avoid the following fallacies.
Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc
This impressive Latin phrase means, after this, therefore because of this. This
fallacy takes for a cause an event that merely happened earlier; for example, A
black cat crossed my path and ten minutes later I broke my ankle; therefore, the black cat
caused my broken ankle. Unless the speaker tripped over the cat, such a statement
is as unreasonable as Night follows day; therefore, day causes night.
Card stacking means using only the evidence that supports a thesis and ignoring that which contradicts or weakens it. Card stacking is dishonest and can
sometimes do serious damage. Suppose, for instance, that a popular newspaper columnist dislikes the mayor of the city. The columnist could prevent the
mayors reelection simply by emphasizing the administrations mistakes and
playing down its accomplishments. Soon, the readers of the newspaper would
begin to think of the mayor as a bungler who shouldnt be reelected.
Unfair? Of course. Its also unnecessary. A reasonable thesis doesnt require
card stacking. A writer can make concessions and still advance the argument;
for example, Although the mayor has made some attempts to attract convention
business, the efforts have been too few and too late. If a thesis isnt reasonable
and if it requires card stacking for support, it probably isnt worth defending,
and the writer should change it.
A variation of card stacking is slanting, systematically using words whose connotations suggest extreme approval or disapproval of the subject. A person may
be a bag of bones or have a models figure. In either case, the weight is the
same, but one term suggests scorn and the other approval. The conscious use of
slanting to sway opinion is, like card stacking, quite dishonest. But do not confuse slanting with a writers legitimate efforts to convey admittedly personal
impressions and emotions.
One snowflake doesnt make a blizzard, nor does one experience make a universal law. That one student has cheated on the last five psychology quizzes
doesnt mean that all psychology students in the school are cheaters; to say so
is to make a hasty generalization, to draw a conclusion about a group that is
based on insufficient evidence.
CHAPTER 15 Argumentation
Overgeneralizations are similar to hasty generalizations. Overgeneralization
occurs, regardless of how much evidence is available, when one assumes
that all members of a group, nationality, race, or sex have the characteristics
observed in some members of that group: all feminists hate housework; the
English are always cold and reserved; never trust a used-car salesperson.
Surely its possible that some feminists like to cook, that some English people
are volatile, and that at least one or two used-car salespersons are trustworthy.
Words such as all, never, always, every, true, and untrue are seldom justified when
dealing with the complexities of human beings and human institutions. You
would do well in writing your papers to qualify potentially troublesome generalizations with words such as some, seldom, tend, sometimes, frequently, seem,
appear, often, perhaps, and many. Both hasty generalizations and overgeneralizations lead to prejudice and superstition and to theses that cannot be developed
logically or effectively.
Meaning it does not follow, a non sequitur is a conclusion that does not follow from the premises. For example:
I was a volunteer worker this summer so now I am saving to go to medical
Usually, non sequiturs occur because the writer or speaker neglects to make
the connection between the premises and the conclusion clear to readers. In the
preceding example, the writers thinking probably resembles this:
I worked as a volunteer this summer for an organization that served men
and women with serious diseases.
These people suffered greatly.
I felt that I was able to bring them some comfort from their pain and that this
work gave me great satisfaction.
Id like to be able to help ill people.
Therefore, I am saving to go to medical school so that I can become a physician and bring even more comfort to the sick.
Although the writer sees the connection easily, he has to reveal thought processes so that the audience may also see the connection.
Another kind of non sequitur occurs because the writer or speaker draws an
incorrect or debatable conclusion:
Jack is 6 feet, 7 inches tall; I want him on my basketball team.
The unstated syllogism that leads to the conclusion is
Successful basketball players tend to be very tall.
Jack is very tall.
Therefore, Jack will be a successful basketball player.
Although both the major premise and the minor premise are true, the conclusion does not necessarily follow. Jack may be so awkward that he trips over his
own feet; thus, not all tall people make good basketball players. The writers
conclusion is, therefore, questionable and perhaps should be rejected.
Ignoring the Question
In ignoring the question, the writer or speaker deliberately or unintentionally
shifts emphasis from the topic under discussion. You can (but should not) ignore a question in several ways.
Ad Hominem Argument
Arguing ad hominem (literally, against the man) means making an irrelevant
attack on a person rather than dealing with the actual issue under discussion.
Suppose, for example, that Senator Goodfellow, who has admitted to cheating
on his income tax for the past five years, proposes a bill for welfare reform.
It would be a fallacy to attack the bill by arguing that its proponent is guilty
of tax evasion. The bill may be logical, humane, and in the best interest of the
country. If it is not, what are its weaknesses? The bill, not Senator Goodfellows problems with the Internal Revenue Service, should be the subject of
Not all personal attacks, of course, are necessarily irrelevant. If Senator
Goodfellow were seeking reelection, one could logically approve of his ideas
and still vote against him because his character defects indicate the danger of
trusting him in a position of power and responsibility.
Straw Man Argument
The writer or speaker attributes to the opposition actions or beliefs of which
the opposition is not guilty and then attacks the opposition for those actions or
Parents who boast of never having to spank their children should feel shame
instead of pride. Discipline and socially responsible behavior are vitally important, and people who sneer at such things deserve the condemnation of all concerned citizens.
Some parents might very well be able to boast of not having to spank their children and yet also demand of their children discipline and socially responsible
CHAPTER 15 Argumentation
Begging the Question
The writer or speaker assumes in the thesis something that really needs to be
Since students learn to write in high school, the college composition course
is a waste of time and should be replaced by a more useful and stimulating
One who chooses to write a paper with that thesis has the obligation to prove
that students do learn how to write in high schoola source of great controversy in all discussions of American education.
Shifting the Burden of Proof
Logic requires that whoever asserts must prove. It is not logical to say,
I believe the flu epidemic was caused by a conspiracy of large drug companies,
and you cant prove it wasnt.
For the assertion to be taken seriously, the writer must offer reasonable proof of
Arguing in a circle means simply restating the premise instead of giving a reason for holding the premise.
I like detective novels because mystery stories always give me great pleasure.
All that sentence says is, I like detective novels because I like detective novels. Of greater interest would be the characteristics of the detective novels the
speaker does like. In other words, one needs a reason for liking detective novels, and to say that one likes them because they give pleasure is not to give a
reason. Why do the novels give pleasure? An honest answer to that question
will provide a workable thesis and prevent a circular argument.
In the either/or fallacy, the writer or speaker suggests that there are only two
alternatives when, in fact, there may be more.
Although I am quite ill, I must turn my term paper in tomorrow, or I will fail the
The writer presents only two alternatives; however, it is also possible that
the instructor, recognizing the students illness, might accept a late paper.
Of course, if one is cursed with a professor who does not accept late papers,
regardless of circumstances, then one actually has only two alternatives, and
no fallacy exists.
Argument by Analogy
An analogy is an extended comparison. It can clarify a difficult concept or dramatize an abstraction by comparing the unfamiliar with the familiar. But an
analogy doesnt prove anything because, regardless of the number of similarities between two things, there are always some differences. One cant assume
that because two things are alike in some respects, they are alike in all respects.
Consider the following example.
Learning to write a good essay is like learning to drive a car. Beginning drivers feel overwhelmed by the number of operations they must perform to keep
a car movingcontrolling the brake and the accelerator, staying in their lane,
watching the cars in front of them while keeping an eye on the rear-view mirror. In addition, they must observe all traffic laws. The tasks seem insurmountable. Yet, in time, some of the operations become almost automatic and
the drivers relax enough so that they can even look at the scenery now and then.
So it is with beginning writers. At first, they wonder how they can make an outline for a paper, write clear topic sentences, develop paragraphs, provide transitions, write good introductions and conclusions, and still observe all the rules
of English grammar. As with driving, part of the process eventually becomes
automatic, and the writers relax enough to concentrate primarily on the ideas
they wish to develop.
The comparison deals only with the similarities of feelings in the two experiences and is a successful analogy because it clarifies the experience of writing for the beginner. But if one extends the comparison to encompass other
demands on driverschecking antifreeze, repairing flats, maintaining brake
fluidthe analogy falls apart.
Historical analogies present a similar problem. We cant assume that because two historical events are alike in some respects, the outcomes will inevitably be the same. You have probably heard the argument that the United
States is on the verge of collapse because some conditions hererelaxed
sexual mores, widespread demand for immediate pleasure, and political
cynicism and corruptionparallel those of the Roman Empire just before its
fall. The argument doesnt consider, among other things, that the forms of
government differ, that the bases for the economy differ, or that the means
of educating the population differ. The two societies are not alike in every
respect, and one cannot assume that because one society fell, the other also
Analogy can be useful for clarifying an idea, but argument by analogy can
CHAPTER 15 Argumentation
Following are examples of logical fallacies. Read them, and determine what
type of fallacy each most strongly represents.
1. I lost my wallet yesterday. I knew that walking under that ladder in the
morning would be trouble!
2. Yesterday, my neighbors sixteen-year-old son zoomed out of the driveway in his new car and barely missed my daughter, who was riding
her tricycle on the sidewalk. Last week, a seventeen-year-old girl hit
the rear of my car when I had to stop suddenly for a traffic light. When
are we going to come to our senses and raise the legal driving age to
3. How can she be guilty of that crime? She has such a lovely familythey
go to church regularly and are such friendly people.
4. Of course shes poor. Look at that old torn coat shes wearing!
5. How can Senator OMalley speak for labor? What does he know about
the needs of the average worker? He was born rich.
6. I love visiting Wyoming because I really enjoy traveling out West.
7. We must change this unfair method of closing fire stations.
8. We should either pay our teachers better salaries or ad …
Purchase answer to see full
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more