Larry uses an appeal to tradition as his reasoning. We do not qualify “that’s how it has always been done” as good reasoning yet Moore is quick to accept that answer. He does not really make an effort to challenge the response he was given, only questioning what political party Larry belonged to. By allowing this logical fallacy to be over looked, the viewer is even more curious for the answer. It may be a question too complicated to answer with complete concrete reasoning that Moore chooses to accept Godfried’s answer to avoid what may weaken his argument for universal healthcare.
Often to amateur writers, the process of writing seems like a chore; a mountain of words to sieve through before they can create a comprehensible wall of text. Lamott uses witty lines and anecdotes from famous writers to show that everyone faces the same problem and provides a simple enough solution. In my mind at least, this short piece has enabled me to look at essays in a different manner. That it’s alright to make mistakes and your first draft can be like throwing poop at a blank canvas; you can always clean it up later. In persuading her readers, Lamott uses ethos, logos and pathos to great effect.
He agreed with his friend, and said under the sway of the machine, he “changed arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.” The story suggests that the Internet isn’t the sole reason for changing the way of thinking, but possibly technology in general. To go along with this thought, Carr also mentions how television, magazine, and newspaper ads have started using our new methods of absorbing information to create a compact and to-the-point advertisement design, further proving how our mind states have been
This is done by providing relevant & descriptive information. Another strength is the author’s gripping voice, as well as that the author writes as if he talking to the reader. On the negative side, there is only one major weakness, and its the very abrupt transitions between his topics The author isn’t taking a stance in an argument in this article; it is written with the mindset that being unconventional is good. This mindset is conveyed very well to reader by the end of the article. The data Gladwell presents is credible as it comes from primary sources such as Ranadive himself and quotes from Lawrence’s diary and other reliable sources such as the late general Maurice de Saxe.
To try and prove these assumptions, the ad shows inserts of highly credible sources such as The Wall Street Journal, and Tax Policy Center to say that he will not give detail on what he will do to the middle class taxes, they say his plans will be forced to raise them. Although this is based on some truth, the ad is not completely based on all truth. I do not think that the ad is completely effective after the facts that have been found. It is because the main dispute on the raising of the middle class families is not completely true; it is what the Democrats think Romney will choose to do. But because Mitt Romney has not told exactly what he plans on doing, the main point of the ad is a
Yes, the information was very relevant to the topic. It provided a lot of different ways to approach critical thinking while reading. It shows that a person must be assertive, open minded, ability and willingness to think critical while reading materials and papers. What I liked the best about it was taking the time while reading to stop and analyze the writing and think about the subject so you have a better understanding of it. The information really stayed on topic while all the different views of the reading, it’s really showed how critical thinking while reading is very important Does the information reflect a bias on the author’s part?
I am simply attempting to imitate the actions of a “SNOOT” that David Foster Wallace has attempted to incorporate into the English language. At the same time, I am unlike David Foster Wallace in that his made up word essentially represents his literary virtuosity and intellect. Although I display prowess in the kinesthetic world, I struggle to produce exceptional work in my writing. Because Wallace presents himself and his intelligence in such a confident way, it appears that writing flows effortlessly from his fingers. Even reading the work he has produced is intimidating in itself.
Presented in the argument above, the author claims that a new store should be built in Plainsville. The argument seems at first glance to be a reasonable decision. After a careful inspection, however, one will find that it suffers from several critical flaws as follows, rendering it logically unconvincing as it stands. The threshold flaw with the argument is that the author unfairly assumes residents in P (Plainsville) do highly concerned with leading healthy lives, upon which he finally draws his conclusion. Although the author offers several facts, which seems to be compelling to substantiate his conclusion, these facts actually lend little credence to the author’s claim after close scrutiny.
Rather they are basing their facts on controversial issues. Granted this might be the reasons families have changed, but Fox and Fumia should have conducted their own research on this subject matter to make their article more reliable. Interviewing several families, does not proof why the constructions of families have differed from the traditional family. Further, none of the families interviewed by Fox and Fumia held the government liable for their new way of life. They simply choose this way of life, because it suited them the best.
While Carr’s arguments lead to the viable point that technology is now so deeply riveted into the fabric of our lives that we have lost control over its influence on us, he is not the first to be concerned. According to Carr, Socrates thought very little of the advancement of writing due to the fact that it would force society to forfeit the use of their memory because of the abundance of written material that would then be available. He also believed that people would, without receiving knowledge from credible sources, rely alone on their own interpretation of information and in turn become ignorant. Carr sees Socrates’ way of thinking as “short-sighted,” even though his argument in relationship to the internet mirrors that of Socrates’. Google has “[served] to spread information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge” today in the same way that the development of writing expanded the mind of an individual in the first century (Carr 8).