Rauch also states that though prejudice may be misguided belief, there is no need to choose sides and that is the beauty of intellectual pluralism. Rauch’s essay states that knowledge is what leads to pluralism and more knowledge is not necessarily a good thing. By saying, “We cannot know in advance or for sure which belief is prejudice and which is truth, but to advanced knowledge we don’t need to know”, (393), he supports his idea. But in order to gain intellect on anything, you have to have knowledge. At the end of the day, we survive on basic knowledge.
This thesis statement should be clear and concise, neither too obvious (in no need of argumentative support) nor outlandish (unable to be supported by the text). The analysis, then, should consistently support this thesis. This structure will demonstrate your ability to comprehend a text and demonstrate how it works . . .
Simpler questions would be “Is Dr. Smith’s intentional practise of omitting important information relevant to his client’s treatment ethical?” or “Is Dr. Smith’s failure to report his client’s actions to the authorities morally justifiable?” Both would be good questions, but I believe the question the study guide asks us to consider embrace both of these questions. The possible answers to the question are “yes” or “no”. I will be using rule-based utilitarianism and Kantian deontology to analyse this case study. There is not enough information to consider act-based utilitarianism: Act-based utilitarianism essentially says that one should perform that act which will bring about the greatest amount of good (“happiness”) over bad for everyone affected by the act. Each situation and each person must be assessed on their own merits (Thiroux, 2004, p. 42).
Both of these men invite controversy in what they say, but confidently support the points they are trying to get across. After not only reading, but understanding the writing of each of them, it is more clear that a historian and a cartographer are not necessarily liars or fakes, but they also do not get every exact detail down because that would be a replica rather than a representation, which would be impossible to have considering they are completely inaccessible. For them, it is about selectivity and persuasion. They each must choose what they feel is most relevant and important, and persuade their viewers to believe it and agree. That is what makes a great historian and cartographer; not getting all of them, but getting the right facts, details, and features down for their proposed
False statements and bad advice come from the lack of any of these elements. Exhibiting these three aspects of character in your discourse can play a large part in gaining credibility for your ideas. As regards the academic essay, be sure to have your writing appear written by a person of good sense by following the format dictated by the Modern Language Association (M.L.A.) or American Psychological Association (A.P.A.) or whatever your particular academic community wants.
In this particular case, Murray does a great job sharing personal experiences upon his argument of whether there should be more vocational schools and stop using a college degree as a requirement for jobs, but stands defenseless due to the omission of statistics where only one statistic stands to defend his position. In Anglesey’s article “How Can I Incorporate Evidence into My Paper” she states that “[one needs] the author’s expertise to solidify [their] claim” which Murray does not do successfully in his paper, which ultimately weakens the evidence Murray can provide to specify his opposition and argument. Moreover, the type of evidence Murray could have recognized to portray a logical standpoint would have been to include facts of pursing high educational degrees and comparing them to those individuals searching for jobs without an efficient education. Also, including data of how past and present years have on individuals with the qualifications of education end of pursing high paying jobs. Murray could have went in so many directions rather than just providing one fact and relying on the rest of his essay on personal
McNeill mainly stresses about the relevancy of history from an academic viewpoint, focusing on which parts belong in the classroom and how they benefit an individual. On the other hand, Stearns views historical knowledge from an artistic angle, stating that “History as art and entertainment serves a real purpose, on aesthetic grounds but also on the level of human understanding.” (Stearns, Pg.2) He focuses on how studying history can help someone understand the beauty of society and morality, but agrees with McNeill in that it is also crucial as a source for the future. Furthermore, Stearns explains that the skills one develop when studying history will also benefit them in a broad branch of studies. The ability to efficiently assess different evidence and form an argument, for example, is important in many fields other than history itself. Ultimately, the purpose of studying history is to gain knowledge and experiences that forms “ that elusive creature, the well informed citizen.” (Stearn, Pg.5) With historical knowledge itself, an individual is well immersed in their own culture and identity, and able to understand the values of the current society.
Study of History: The Battle of Gettysburg The study of history is categorized as a social science. As such it cannot be regarded as an exact science in which hypotheses can be proven unequivocally with empirical evidence. Instead historians rely on as much evidence in the form of primary, and secondary when necessary, sources as possible in order to validate their hypotheses. Unfortunately, unlike empirical evidence, this historical evidence is vulnerable to the personal and cultural biases of both the original authors and the historians analyzing it. A prime example of a historical event subject to contradictory accounts is the Battle of Gettysburg.
Give those who disagree with you a fair go. Try to meet their arguments with better ones. Scholarship is not a matter of political point‐scoring: you must respect evidence and superior arguments. Your argument should be consistent, and the language used should be clear, grammatical and precise. Furthermore, an essay is a finished piece of work, not a draft or a series of notes.
It was only the statement of Nan-in that made the reader believe the professor's notions. Judging the action of Nan-in, what the story would like to teach is that one must keep an open mind in order to understand something or to acquire new knowledge. What the reader probably did not see is the swift judgement of Nan-in towards the professor. Assuming that they just met, does it not an act of being judgmental