TOK Presentation
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•3,398 views
This document provides guidance on how to approach case studies and turn them into presentations with 3 key elements: 1) Choose a contemporary issue to examine and explain its significance, making sure to consider different perspectives on the issue. 2) Identify your main knowledge claims about the issue and support them with evidence, considering alternative views. 3) Evaluate the validity and certainty of your knowledge claims from your perspective as the presenter, addressing potential weaknesses.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Recommended
MCM2100 Term Paper Assignment: Critical Analysis
This presentation is designed to further explain your term paper assignment in MCM2100.
How to make a great Theory of Knowledge presentation
Major rules and tips to create a good Theory of Knowledge presentation
Writing - Claims & Evidences (Argumentative Paper Part 1)
Grammar - Claims & Evidences (Argumentative Paper Part 1)
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes bel.docx
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes beliefs about the way the world was, is, or is going to be that the communicator wants us to accept as “facts.” These beliefs can be conclusions, reasons, or assumptions. We can refer to such beliefs as factual claims. The first question you should ask about a factual claim is, “Why should I believe it?” Your next question is, “Does the claim need evidence to support it?” If it does, and if there is no evidence, the claim is a mere assertion, meaning a claim that is not backed up in any way. You should seriously question the dependability of mere assertions! If there is evidence, your next question is, “How good is the evidence?” To evaluate reasoning, we need to remember that some factual claims can be counted on more than others. For example, you probably feel quite certain that the claim “most U.S. senators are men” is true, but less certain that the assertion “practicing yoga reduces the risk of cancer” is true. Because it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to establish the absolute truth or falsity of most claims, rather than asking whether they are true, we prefer to ask whether they are dependable. In essence, we want to ask, “Can we count on such beliefs?” The greater the quality and quantity of evidence supporting a claim, the more we can depend on it, and the more we can call the claim a “fact.” For example, abundant evidence exists that George Washington was the first president of the United States of America. Thus, we can treat that claim as a fact. On the other hand, there is much conflicting evidence for the belief “bottled water is safer to drink than tap water.” We thus can’t treat this belief as a fact. The major difference between claims that are opinions and those that are facts is the present state of the relevant evidence. The more supporting evidence there is for a belief, the more “factual” the belief becomes. Before we judge the persuasiveness of a communication, we need to know which factual claims are most dependable. How do we determine dependability? We ask questions like the following: What is your proof? How do you know that’s true? Where’s the evidence? Why do you believe that? Are you sure that’s true? Can you prove it? You will be well on your way to being among the best critical thinkers when you develop the habit of regularly asking these questions. They require those making arguments to be responsible by revealing the basis for their arguments. Anyone with an argument that you should consider will not hesitate to answer these questions. They know they have substantial support for their claims and, consequently, will want to share their evidence in the hope that you will learn to share their conclusions. When people react to simple requests for evidence with anger or withdrawal, they usually do so because they are embarrassed as they realize that, without evidence, they should have been less assertive about their beliefs. When we regula.
Recommended
MCM2100 Term Paper Assignment: Critical Analysis
This presentation is designed to further explain your term paper assignment in MCM2100.
How to make a great Theory of Knowledge presentation
Major rules and tips to create a good Theory of Knowledge presentation
Writing - Claims & Evidences (Argumentative Paper Part 1)
Grammar - Claims & Evidences (Argumentative Paper Part 1)
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes bel.docx
THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE Almost all reasoning we encounter includes beliefs about the way the world was, is, or is going to be that the communicator wants us to accept as “facts.” These beliefs can be conclusions, reasons, or assumptions. We can refer to such beliefs as factual claims. The first question you should ask about a factual claim is, “Why should I believe it?” Your next question is, “Does the claim need evidence to support it?” If it does, and if there is no evidence, the claim is a mere assertion, meaning a claim that is not backed up in any way. You should seriously question the dependability of mere assertions! If there is evidence, your next question is, “How good is the evidence?” To evaluate reasoning, we need to remember that some factual claims can be counted on more than others. For example, you probably feel quite certain that the claim “most U.S. senators are men” is true, but less certain that the assertion “practicing yoga reduces the risk of cancer” is true. Because it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to establish the absolute truth or falsity of most claims, rather than asking whether they are true, we prefer to ask whether they are dependable. In essence, we want to ask, “Can we count on such beliefs?” The greater the quality and quantity of evidence supporting a claim, the more we can depend on it, and the more we can call the claim a “fact.” For example, abundant evidence exists that George Washington was the first president of the United States of America. Thus, we can treat that claim as a fact. On the other hand, there is much conflicting evidence for the belief “bottled water is safer to drink than tap water.” We thus can’t treat this belief as a fact. The major difference between claims that are opinions and those that are facts is the present state of the relevant evidence. The more supporting evidence there is for a belief, the more “factual” the belief becomes. Before we judge the persuasiveness of a communication, we need to know which factual claims are most dependable. How do we determine dependability? We ask questions like the following: What is your proof? How do you know that’s true? Where’s the evidence? Why do you believe that? Are you sure that’s true? Can you prove it? You will be well on your way to being among the best critical thinkers when you develop the habit of regularly asking these questions. They require those making arguments to be responsible by revealing the basis for their arguments. Anyone with an argument that you should consider will not hesitate to answer these questions. They know they have substantial support for their claims and, consequently, will want to share their evidence in the hope that you will learn to share their conclusions. When people react to simple requests for evidence with anger or withdrawal, they usually do so because they are embarrassed as they realize that, without evidence, they should have been less assertive about their beliefs. When we regula.
Case Study 10.1 Introduction to the Case Study Introduction to.docx
Case Study / 10.1 Introduction to the Case Study
Introduction to the Case Study
This last chapter is different from the others. Instead of introducing a new area of critical thinking, it is a capstone activity in which you will apply the skills you've learned to one contemporary, controversial issue.
The topic for this case study is global climate change. Because it is beyond the scope of this course to thoroughly evaluate a complex scientific topic, you will not be expected to form a position or offer your opinion on this topic. Rather, the material in this chapter is presented for you to practice evaluating arguments, identifying fallacies, and questioning sources—with the hope that you will continue to apply these skills whenever you encounter material aimed to persuade.
This chapter won't present any new exposition. Instead, we provide some relevant review notes that have been excerpted from the earlier chapters. You can consult these notes if you need a refresher as you work through the final videos, articles, and questions in the course.
REVIEW NOTES
Arguments
To say that something is true is to make a claim. But to give reasons to believe that it is true is to make an argument. Thus all arguments consist of at least two parts:
1. premise – one or more reasons to support the claim
2. conclusion – the claim being supported
Common Fallacies
Fallacy:a type of flawed reasoning
1. Begging the question: fallacy where the argument relies on a premise that resembles the conclusion, depends on the conclusion, or is as controversial as the conclusion.
2. Appeal to popularity: fallacy where the arguer attempts to bolster his or her argument by mentioning that "everybody" (or a large group of people) shares the same belief, preference, or habit.
3. Post hoc ergo propter hoc: fallacy where the arguer assumes that because there is a correlation between two events (i.e., one preceded the other), then the first must have caused the second. The phrase is Latin for "after this, therefore because of this."
4. Appeal to ignorance: fallacy where the arguer claims that because something cannot be proven false, it must be true unless the opponent can disprove the conclusion.
5. Appeal to emotion: fallacy where the arguer tries to persuade the audience by arousing feelings such as pity, fear, patriotism, flattery, etc. in lieu of presenting rational arguments.
6. Unqualified authority: fallacy where the arguer tries to get people to agree by appealing to the reputation of someone who is not an expert in the field or otherwise qualified to prove that something is true.
7. Ad hominem: fallacy where the arguer attacks his or her opponent's personal characteristics, qualifications, or circumstances instead of the argument presented. The phrase is Latin for "to the man."
8. False dichotomy: fallacy where the arguer inaccurately portrays a circumstance as having a limited number of possible outcomes, thus setting up an either-or situation with the intent of prese ...
7The Argument Component of your Mental MapKeywordsargu
7
The Argument Component of your Mental Map
Keywords
arguments; certainty; generalization; mental map; variation amongst knowledge claims
Having presented the key to the mental map (a set of tools for thinking), we now briefly introduce the mental map components, before focusing in detail on the first component: the match between claims and warranting in arguments. How do the components relate to the tools? The authors whose work you study will have employed the tools for thinking in order to develop a convincing argument. The four components of the mental map will help you evaluate a range of factors that contribute to the content and robustness of that argument (
Table 7.1
).
In short, your mental map will enable you to home in on what authors were trying to do, why and with what success. In this chapter, we discuss the component that focuses on the match between authors’ claims and the quality of the evidence supporting them.
Two dimensions of variation among knowledge claims
In
Part One
, we saw that an argument is constructed from one or more
claims to knowledge
– assertions that something is, or normatively should be, true.
Table 7.1 Components of the mental map
Mental map component
Aspect of authors’ argument that it helps you examine Two
dimensions of variation amongst
Two
dimensions of variation amongst knowledge claims
about the social world, affecting their vulnerability to criticism
Authors’ tentativeness or certainty about their claims and their willingness to generalize, relative to the amount of appropriate evidence available
Three
kinds of knowledge
that are generated by reflecting on, investigating and taking action in the social world
The basis of their claims, as relevant to theory, new research evidence or experience
Four
types of literature
that inform understanding and practice
Whether the account aims to inform theory, research knowledge, practice or policy, and some common weaknesses that can render each type less than convincing
Five sorts of
intellectual project
that generate literature about the social world
Authors’ reasons for undertaking their work: aiming to understand, evaluate, change others’ action directly or through training, or improve their own action
These claims form the conclusion, which is one half of the argument. The claims are supported by some form of warranting: the half of the argument that justifies why the conclusion should be accepted. Claims vary along two important dimensions, according to the amount of appropriate evidence contained in the warranting. If there is a mismatch, we see the warranting as inadequate.
In
Chapter 3
, we saw how warranting can be provided, and be appropriate, but still be inadequate – not sufficiently convincing for the critical reader. An inadequately warranted claim often fails to convince because:
It is based on an insufficient amount of robust evidence to support the degree of
certainty
with which this claim is made.
The e ...
WRITING ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYSFor most people, the true test
WRITING ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYS
For most people, the true test of their critical thinking skills comes when they write an argumentative essay, one that takes a stand on an issue and uses logic and evidence to convince readers. When you write an argument, you follow the same process you use when you write any essay. However, because the purpose of an argument is to change the way readers think, you need to use some additional strategies to present your ideas to your audience.
A)
Planning an Argumentative Essay
1) Choosing a Debatable Topic
Because an argumentative essay attempts to change the way people think, it must focus on a
debatable topic
, one about which reasonable people may disagree. Factual statements—verifiable assertions about which reasonable people do not disagree—are, therefore, not suitable as topics for argument.
Fact:
First-year students are not required to purchase a meal plan from the university.
Debatable Topic:
First-year students should be required to purchase a meal plan from the university.
Your topic should be narrow enough so that you can write about it within your page limit. Remember, in your argumentative essay, you will have to develop your own ideas and present convincing support while also pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of opposing arguments. If your topic is too broad, you will not be able to treat it in enough detail.
In addition, your topic should be interesting to you and to your readers. Keep in mind that some topics—such as “The Need for Gun Control” or “The Fairness of the Death Penalty”—have been discussed and written about so often that you may not be able to say anything new or interesting about them. Instead of relying on an overused topic, choose one that enables you to contribute something to the debate.
2) Developing an Argumentative Thesis
After you have chosen a topic, your next step is to state your position in an
argumentative thesis
, one that takes a strong stand. Properly worded, this thesis statement lays the foundation for the rest of your argument. One way to make sure that your thesis statement actually does take a stand is to formulate an
antithesis
, a statement that takes the opposite position. If you can state an antithesis, your thesis statement takes a stand.
Thesis Statement:
Term limits would improve government by bringing people with fresh ideas into office every few years.
Antithesis:
Term limits would harm government because elected officials would always be inexperienced.
To make sure your argumentative thesis is effective, ask the following questions:
Is your thesis one with which reasonable people would disagree?
Can you formulate an antithesis?
Can your thesis be supported by evidence?
Does your thesis make clear to readers what position you are taking?
3) Defining Your Terms
You should always define the key terms you use in your argument— especially those you use in your thesis statement. After all, the soundness of an ...
For you own analysis. Take on one of the following a written essay,.docx
For you own analysis. Take on one of the following: a written essay, an image, or advertisement. Examine the text closely – with a particular posture toward analysis. Consider the main Argumentative moves and the following questions:
1.
Audience/Rhetorical Situation:
Who is the audience? Can you tell? If it’s not clear by the language and nature of the argument, consider the publication. Where was ti published? What organization wrote, supports, or sponsors the publication?
2.
Claim:
what is the main claim ( or thesis)? What type of claim is it? In other words, what is the argument working toward? Does it seek to make the audience evaluate the worth of something (claim of value); believe in a past. Present, or future condition (fact); or want to do something (claim of policy)?
3.
Line of Reasoning:
Every argument has some line of reasoning – premises that walk the audience toward the main claim. What individual premises are asserted? How do they lead to the main claim? What premises are unstated? What points does the reader fill in?
4.
Other Appeals:
How does the argument tap into shared value(courage, peace. Honor, trust, personal responsibility, knowledge)? How does the argument prompt a certain feeling (fear, anger, hope, regret)? How does the argument call on basic human needs (safety, belonging, actualization)? How does the argument refer directly to the writer’s own experience or wisdom?
5.
Examples and evidence:
how does the argument rely on allusions, scenarios, illustrations, anecdotes, personal testimony, facts, or statistics? How do the specific forms of example or evidence function in overall argument? How do they support the main claim or serve within an appeal?
6.
Opposition:
In what ways does the argument engage opposition? Or how does the opposition shape the premises of the argument?
7.
Values:
what assumptions do you detect? What does the argument assume, but not necessarily state, about the topic – or people, institutions, life, social norms, and so on? Do those assumptions point to any underlying values
.
Writing to Persuade—OWL
Basics of writing a persuasive essay. By the Purdue Online Writer's Lab (OWL)
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
Informal Fallacies
Enterline Design Services LLC/iStock/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Describe the various fallacies of support, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
2. Describe the various fallacies of relevance, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
3. Describe the various fallacies of clarity, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
We can conceive of logic as providing us with the best tools for seeking truth. If our goal is to seek truth, then we must be clear that the task isnot limited to the formation of true beliefs based on a solid logical foundation, for the task also involves learning to avoid forming falsebeliefs. Therefore, just as it is important to learn to employ good reasoning, it is also important to learn to avoid bad reasoning.
Toward this end, this chapter will focus on fallacies. Fallacies are errors in reasoning; more specifically, they are common patterns ofreasoning with a high likelihood of leading to false conclusions. Logical fallacies often seem like good reasoning because they resembleperfectly legitimate argument forms. For example, the following is a perfectly valid argument:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in Paris.
Therefore, you live in France.
Assuming that both of the premises are true, it logically follows that the conclusion must be true. The following argument is very similar:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in France.
Therefore, you live in Paris.
This second argument, however, is invalid; there are plenty of other places to live in France. This is a common formal fallacy known asaffirming the consequent. Chapter 4 discussed how this fallacy was based on an incorrect logical form. This chapter will focus on informalfallacies, fallacies whose errors are not so much a matter of form but of content. The rest of this chapter will cover some of the most commonand important fallacies, with definitions and examples. Learning about fallacies can be a lot of fun, but be warned: Once you begin noticingfallacies, you may start to see them everywhere.
Before we start, it is worth noting a few things. First, there are many, many fallacies. This chapter will consider only a sampling of some of themost well-known fallacies. Second, there is a lot of overlap between fallacies. Reasonable people can interpret the same errors as differentfallacies. Focus on trying to understand both interpretations rather than on insisting that only one can be right. Third, different philosophersoften have different terminology for the same fallacies and make different distinctions among them. Therefore, you may find that others usedifferent terminology for the fallacies that we will learn about in this chapter. Not to worry—it is the ideas here that are most important: Ourgoal is to learn to identi.
Arguing and Evidence: Writing Academic Essays
This lesson is over making arguments with supporting evidence for academic essays.
Ethos (think ETHICAL Appeal of the Writer)This appeal invo.docx
Ethos (think ETHICAL Appeal of the Writer)
This appeal involves convincing your audience that you are intelligent and can be trusted. In other words, this appeal shows that you are CREDIBLE, a reliable source of information and have sought out reliable information on the topic. Writers cannot simply say to their audience "I can be trusted because I'm smart and a good person." This appeal is perhaps the most difficult to establish; a writer has to prove him or herself by demonstrating that he or she understands what is being argued by:
Providing personal experience or know someone else who has relevant personal experience,
Using expert support to show that you are knowledgeable on the topic:
· through extensive research,
· through up-to-date research
· through recognized authorities in the field (this will also help to prevent your appeal from seeming too personal),
· through recent, relevant research.
Using an appropriate writing style by means of professional and strong words that carry appropriate connotations.
Treating your audience with respect while showing that you have your audience’s best interests at heart by
· establishing some common ground. You can do this by acknowledging the opinion of the opposition, and then show how both sides agree on at least one aspect. This is essential in establishing your ethos (or credibility) and your ability to treat the topic fairly. Be careful not to over-do this however so that it remains clear which side you are supporting.
· paving common ground by utilizing shared values, hopes, expectations, dreams, ideas, fears, etc.
· establishing common ground through the use of details the audience can relate to and/or identify with.
Logos (think LOGICAL Appeal)
You appeal to logic when you rely on your audience’s intelligence and when you offer credible evidence to support your argument. That evidence includes:
· FACTS- These are valuable because they are not debatable; they represent the truth
· EXAMPLES- These include events or circumstances that your audience can relate to their life and, thus, makes sense to them.
· PRECEDENTS- These are specific examples (historical and personal) from the past (I hurt myself when I did that, so it makes sense not to do that again)
· AUTHORITY- The authority must be timely (not out-dated), and it must be qualified to judge the topic and, thus, make sense why it is being used to support a point (and overall argument).
· DEDUCTIVE/INDUCTIVE- Deductive reasoning is when you pick apart evidence to reach conclusions, and inductive reasoning is when you add logical pieces to the evidence to reach conclusions.
Pathos (think PASSIONATE or emotional Appeal)
This kind of appeal can be very effective if it’s not over-done, especially if your topic is an emotional one. Because an audience has emotions as well as intellect, an argument should seek to engage the audience emotionally. However, using emotional appeal alone is not as effective as when it is used in conjunctio ...
More Related Content
Similar to TOK Presentation
Case Study 10.1 Introduction to the Case Study Introduction to.docx
Case Study / 10.1 Introduction to the Case Study
Introduction to the Case Study
This last chapter is different from the others. Instead of introducing a new area of critical thinking, it is a capstone activity in which you will apply the skills you've learned to one contemporary, controversial issue.
The topic for this case study is global climate change. Because it is beyond the scope of this course to thoroughly evaluate a complex scientific topic, you will not be expected to form a position or offer your opinion on this topic. Rather, the material in this chapter is presented for you to practice evaluating arguments, identifying fallacies, and questioning sources—with the hope that you will continue to apply these skills whenever you encounter material aimed to persuade.
This chapter won't present any new exposition. Instead, we provide some relevant review notes that have been excerpted from the earlier chapters. You can consult these notes if you need a refresher as you work through the final videos, articles, and questions in the course.
REVIEW NOTES
Arguments
To say that something is true is to make a claim. But to give reasons to believe that it is true is to make an argument. Thus all arguments consist of at least two parts:
1. premise – one or more reasons to support the claim
2. conclusion – the claim being supported
Common Fallacies
Fallacy:a type of flawed reasoning
1. Begging the question: fallacy where the argument relies on a premise that resembles the conclusion, depends on the conclusion, or is as controversial as the conclusion.
2. Appeal to popularity: fallacy where the arguer attempts to bolster his or her argument by mentioning that "everybody" (or a large group of people) shares the same belief, preference, or habit.
3. Post hoc ergo propter hoc: fallacy where the arguer assumes that because there is a correlation between two events (i.e., one preceded the other), then the first must have caused the second. The phrase is Latin for "after this, therefore because of this."
4. Appeal to ignorance: fallacy where the arguer claims that because something cannot be proven false, it must be true unless the opponent can disprove the conclusion.
5. Appeal to emotion: fallacy where the arguer tries to persuade the audience by arousing feelings such as pity, fear, patriotism, flattery, etc. in lieu of presenting rational arguments.
6. Unqualified authority: fallacy where the arguer tries to get people to agree by appealing to the reputation of someone who is not an expert in the field or otherwise qualified to prove that something is true.
7. Ad hominem: fallacy where the arguer attacks his or her opponent's personal characteristics, qualifications, or circumstances instead of the argument presented. The phrase is Latin for "to the man."
8. False dichotomy: fallacy where the arguer inaccurately portrays a circumstance as having a limited number of possible outcomes, thus setting up an either-or situation with the intent of prese ...
7The Argument Component of your Mental MapKeywordsargu
7
The Argument Component of your Mental Map
Keywords
arguments; certainty; generalization; mental map; variation amongst knowledge claims
Having presented the key to the mental map (a set of tools for thinking), we now briefly introduce the mental map components, before focusing in detail on the first component: the match between claims and warranting in arguments. How do the components relate to the tools? The authors whose work you study will have employed the tools for thinking in order to develop a convincing argument. The four components of the mental map will help you evaluate a range of factors that contribute to the content and robustness of that argument (
Table 7.1
).
In short, your mental map will enable you to home in on what authors were trying to do, why and with what success. In this chapter, we discuss the component that focuses on the match between authors’ claims and the quality of the evidence supporting them.
Two dimensions of variation among knowledge claims
In
Part One
, we saw that an argument is constructed from one or more
claims to knowledge
– assertions that something is, or normatively should be, true.
Table 7.1 Components of the mental map
Mental map component
Aspect of authors’ argument that it helps you examine Two
dimensions of variation amongst
Two
dimensions of variation amongst knowledge claims
about the social world, affecting their vulnerability to criticism
Authors’ tentativeness or certainty about their claims and their willingness to generalize, relative to the amount of appropriate evidence available
Three
kinds of knowledge
that are generated by reflecting on, investigating and taking action in the social world
The basis of their claims, as relevant to theory, new research evidence or experience
Four
types of literature
that inform understanding and practice
Whether the account aims to inform theory, research knowledge, practice or policy, and some common weaknesses that can render each type less than convincing
Five sorts of
intellectual project
that generate literature about the social world
Authors’ reasons for undertaking their work: aiming to understand, evaluate, change others’ action directly or through training, or improve their own action
These claims form the conclusion, which is one half of the argument. The claims are supported by some form of warranting: the half of the argument that justifies why the conclusion should be accepted. Claims vary along two important dimensions, according to the amount of appropriate evidence contained in the warranting. If there is a mismatch, we see the warranting as inadequate.
In
Chapter 3
, we saw how warranting can be provided, and be appropriate, but still be inadequate – not sufficiently convincing for the critical reader. An inadequately warranted claim often fails to convince because:
It is based on an insufficient amount of robust evidence to support the degree of
certainty
with which this claim is made.
The e ...
WRITING ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYSFor most people, the true test
WRITING ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYS
For most people, the true test of their critical thinking skills comes when they write an argumentative essay, one that takes a stand on an issue and uses logic and evidence to convince readers. When you write an argument, you follow the same process you use when you write any essay. However, because the purpose of an argument is to change the way readers think, you need to use some additional strategies to present your ideas to your audience.
A)
Planning an Argumentative Essay
1) Choosing a Debatable Topic
Because an argumentative essay attempts to change the way people think, it must focus on a
debatable topic
, one about which reasonable people may disagree. Factual statements—verifiable assertions about which reasonable people do not disagree—are, therefore, not suitable as topics for argument.
Fact:
First-year students are not required to purchase a meal plan from the university.
Debatable Topic:
First-year students should be required to purchase a meal plan from the university.
Your topic should be narrow enough so that you can write about it within your page limit. Remember, in your argumentative essay, you will have to develop your own ideas and present convincing support while also pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of opposing arguments. If your topic is too broad, you will not be able to treat it in enough detail.
In addition, your topic should be interesting to you and to your readers. Keep in mind that some topics—such as “The Need for Gun Control” or “The Fairness of the Death Penalty”—have been discussed and written about so often that you may not be able to say anything new or interesting about them. Instead of relying on an overused topic, choose one that enables you to contribute something to the debate.
2) Developing an Argumentative Thesis
After you have chosen a topic, your next step is to state your position in an
argumentative thesis
, one that takes a strong stand. Properly worded, this thesis statement lays the foundation for the rest of your argument. One way to make sure that your thesis statement actually does take a stand is to formulate an
antithesis
, a statement that takes the opposite position. If you can state an antithesis, your thesis statement takes a stand.
Thesis Statement:
Term limits would improve government by bringing people with fresh ideas into office every few years.
Antithesis:
Term limits would harm government because elected officials would always be inexperienced.
To make sure your argumentative thesis is effective, ask the following questions:
Is your thesis one with which reasonable people would disagree?
Can you formulate an antithesis?
Can your thesis be supported by evidence?
Does your thesis make clear to readers what position you are taking?
3) Defining Your Terms
You should always define the key terms you use in your argument— especially those you use in your thesis statement. After all, the soundness of an ...
For you own analysis. Take on one of the following a written essay,.docx
For you own analysis. Take on one of the following: a written essay, an image, or advertisement. Examine the text closely – with a particular posture toward analysis. Consider the main Argumentative moves and the following questions:
1.
Audience/Rhetorical Situation:
Who is the audience? Can you tell? If it’s not clear by the language and nature of the argument, consider the publication. Where was ti published? What organization wrote, supports, or sponsors the publication?
2.
Claim:
what is the main claim ( or thesis)? What type of claim is it? In other words, what is the argument working toward? Does it seek to make the audience evaluate the worth of something (claim of value); believe in a past. Present, or future condition (fact); or want to do something (claim of policy)?
3.
Line of Reasoning:
Every argument has some line of reasoning – premises that walk the audience toward the main claim. What individual premises are asserted? How do they lead to the main claim? What premises are unstated? What points does the reader fill in?
4.
Other Appeals:
How does the argument tap into shared value(courage, peace. Honor, trust, personal responsibility, knowledge)? How does the argument prompt a certain feeling (fear, anger, hope, regret)? How does the argument call on basic human needs (safety, belonging, actualization)? How does the argument refer directly to the writer’s own experience or wisdom?
5.
Examples and evidence:
how does the argument rely on allusions, scenarios, illustrations, anecdotes, personal testimony, facts, or statistics? How do the specific forms of example or evidence function in overall argument? How do they support the main claim or serve within an appeal?
6.
Opposition:
In what ways does the argument engage opposition? Or how does the opposition shape the premises of the argument?
7.
Values:
what assumptions do you detect? What does the argument assume, but not necessarily state, about the topic – or people, institutions, life, social norms, and so on? Do those assumptions point to any underlying values
.
Writing to Persuade—OWL
Basics of writing a persuasive essay. By the Purdue Online Writer's Lab (OWL)
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
Informal Fallacies
Enterline Design Services LLC/iStock/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Describe the various fallacies of support, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
2. Describe the various fallacies of relevance, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
3. Describe the various fallacies of clarity, their origins, and circumstances in which specific arguments may not be fallacious.
We can conceive of logic as providing us with the best tools for seeking truth. If our goal is to seek truth, then we must be clear that the task isnot limited to the formation of true beliefs based on a solid logical foundation, for the task also involves learning to avoid forming falsebeliefs. Therefore, just as it is important to learn to employ good reasoning, it is also important to learn to avoid bad reasoning.
Toward this end, this chapter will focus on fallacies. Fallacies are errors in reasoning; more specifically, they are common patterns ofreasoning with a high likelihood of leading to false conclusions. Logical fallacies often seem like good reasoning because they resembleperfectly legitimate argument forms. For example, the following is a perfectly valid argument:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in Paris.
Therefore, you live in France.
Assuming that both of the premises are true, it logically follows that the conclusion must be true. The following argument is very similar:
If you live in Paris, then you live in France.
You live in France.
Therefore, you live in Paris.
This second argument, however, is invalid; there are plenty of other places to live in France. This is a common formal fallacy known asaffirming the consequent. Chapter 4 discussed how this fallacy was based on an incorrect logical form. This chapter will focus on informalfallacies, fallacies whose errors are not so much a matter of form but of content. The rest of this chapter will cover some of the most commonand important fallacies, with definitions and examples. Learning about fallacies can be a lot of fun, but be warned: Once you begin noticingfallacies, you may start to see them everywhere.
Before we start, it is worth noting a few things. First, there are many, many fallacies. This chapter will consider only a sampling of some of themost well-known fallacies. Second, there is a lot of overlap between fallacies. Reasonable people can interpret the same errors as differentfallacies. Focus on trying to understand both interpretations rather than on insisting that only one can be right. Third, different philosophersoften have different terminology for the same fallacies and make different distinctions among them. Therefore, you may find that others usedifferent terminology for the fallacies that we will learn about in this chapter. Not to worry—it is the ideas here that are most important: Ourgoal is to learn to identi.
Arguing and Evidence: Writing Academic Essays
This lesson is over making arguments with supporting evidence for academic essays.
Ethos (think ETHICAL Appeal of the Writer)This appeal invo.docx
Ethos (think ETHICAL Appeal of the Writer)
This appeal involves convincing your audience that you are intelligent and can be trusted. In other words, this appeal shows that you are CREDIBLE, a reliable source of information and have sought out reliable information on the topic. Writers cannot simply say to their audience "I can be trusted because I'm smart and a good person." This appeal is perhaps the most difficult to establish; a writer has to prove him or herself by demonstrating that he or she understands what is being argued by:
Providing personal experience or know someone else who has relevant personal experience,
Using expert support to show that you are knowledgeable on the topic:
· through extensive research,
· through up-to-date research
· through recognized authorities in the field (this will also help to prevent your appeal from seeming too personal),
· through recent, relevant research.
Using an appropriate writing style by means of professional and strong words that carry appropriate connotations.
Treating your audience with respect while showing that you have your audience’s best interests at heart by
· establishing some common ground. You can do this by acknowledging the opinion of the opposition, and then show how both sides agree on at least one aspect. This is essential in establishing your ethos (or credibility) and your ability to treat the topic fairly. Be careful not to over-do this however so that it remains clear which side you are supporting.
· paving common ground by utilizing shared values, hopes, expectations, dreams, ideas, fears, etc.
· establishing common ground through the use of details the audience can relate to and/or identify with.
Logos (think LOGICAL Appeal)
You appeal to logic when you rely on your audience’s intelligence and when you offer credible evidence to support your argument. That evidence includes:
· FACTS- These are valuable because they are not debatable; they represent the truth
· EXAMPLES- These include events or circumstances that your audience can relate to their life and, thus, makes sense to them.
· PRECEDENTS- These are specific examples (historical and personal) from the past (I hurt myself when I did that, so it makes sense not to do that again)
· AUTHORITY- The authority must be timely (not out-dated), and it must be qualified to judge the topic and, thus, make sense why it is being used to support a point (and overall argument).
· DEDUCTIVE/INDUCTIVE- Deductive reasoning is when you pick apart evidence to reach conclusions, and inductive reasoning is when you add logical pieces to the evidence to reach conclusions.
Pathos (think PASSIONATE or emotional Appeal)
This kind of appeal can be very effective if it’s not over-done, especially if your topic is an emotional one. Because an audience has emotions as well as intellect, an argument should seek to engage the audience emotionally. However, using emotional appeal alone is not as effective as when it is used in conjunctio ...
Similar to TOK Presentation (20)
Case Study 10.1 Introduction to the Case Study Introduction to.docx
Case Study 10.1 Introduction to the Case Study Introduction to.docx
7The Argument Component of your Mental MapKeywordsargu
7The Argument Component of your Mental MapKeywordsargu
WRITING ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYSFor most people, the true test
WRITING ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYSFor most people, the true test
For you own analysis. Take on one of the following a written essay,.docx
For you own analysis. Take on one of the following a written essay,.docx
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
Informal FallaciesEnterline Design Services LLCiStockThinkst.docx
Ethos (think ETHICAL Appeal of the Writer)This appeal invo.docx
Ethos (think ETHICAL Appeal of the Writer)This appeal invo.docx
More from Iain Williamson
Hkfa lecture (ideology)
A lecture used to support student learning (MA) based on ideology with specific reference to the Motor Cycle Diaries.
Representation & tv drama
A presentation to help define key terms for the WJEC (Q3) Section A Media Stud
Storyboard
A short keynote for use with Primary Schools making films for The Hong Kong School Film Awards.
Image And Sound
Taken from Baudry's Film Theory & Criticism this is a taster for IB Film students on sound/image.
The Film Artist
Gives a useful b/ground of the auteur theory as evidenced in Leo Baudry's Film Theory & criticism.
Lance Armstrong
This is a presentation which can be used to introduce issues relating to Theory of Knowledge
Lesson 2 The Arts
A TOK presentation on The Arts. Please note that the first photo of the Nepalese girl is a fake so as the class later learn to appreciate the importance of knowledge by authority e.g. Accepting that what I say as the teacher is true.
More from Iain Williamson (20)
Recently uploaded
"Protectable subject matters, Protection in biotechnology, Protection of othe...
Protectable subject matters, Protection in biotechnology, Protection of other biological materials, Ownership and period of protection
ANATOMY AND BIOMECHANICS OF HIP JOINT.pdf
it describes the bony anatomy including the femoral head , acetabulum, labrum . also discusses the capsule , ligaments . muscle that act on the hip joint and the range of motion are outlined. factors affecting hip joint stability and weight transmission through the joint are summarized.
Delivering Micro-Credentials in Technical and Vocational Education and Training
Explore how micro-credentials are transforming Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) with this comprehensive slide deck. Discover what micro-credentials are, their importance in TVET, the advantages they offer, and the insights from industry experts. Additionally, learn about the top software applications available for creating and managing micro-credentials. This presentation also includes valuable resources and a discussion on the future of these specialised certifications.
For more detailed information on delivering micro-credentials in TVET, visit this https://tvettrainer.com/delivering-micro-credentials-in-tvet/
Digital Artifact 2 - Investigating Pavilion Designs
Digital Artifact 2 - Pavilions
NGV Architecture Commission Competition
MPavilion Commission Competition
Other Pavilion Designs
Acetabularia Information For Class 9 .docx
Acetabularia acetabulum is a single-celled green alga that in its vegetative state is morphologically differentiated into a basal rhizoid and an axially elongated stalk, which bears whorls of branching hairs. The single diploid nucleus resides in the rhizoid.
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS.
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp Network
Dive into the world of AI! Experts Jon Hill and Tareq Monaur will guide you through AI's role in enhancing nonprofit websites and basic marketing strategies, making it easy to understand and apply.
Biological Screening of Herbal Drugs in detailed.
Biological screening of herbal drugs: Introduction and Need for
Phyto-Pharmacological Screening, New Strategies for evaluating
Natural Products, In vitro evaluation techniques for Antioxidants, Antimicrobial and Anticancer drugs. In vivo evaluation techniques
for Anti-inflammatory, Antiulcer, Anticancer, Wound healing, Antidiabetic, Hepatoprotective, Cardio protective, Diuretics and
Antifertility, Toxicity studies as per OECD guidelines
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in Education
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Normal Labour/ Stages of Labour/ Mechanism of Labour
Normal labor is also termed spontaneous labor, defined as the natural physiological process through which the fetus, placenta, and membranes are expelled from the uterus through the birth canal at term (37 to 42 weeks
Advantages and Disadvantages of CMS from an SEO Perspective
Advantages and Disadvantages of CMS from an SEO Perspective
PCOS corelations and management through Ayurveda.
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty,
International FDP on Fundamentals of Research in Social Sciences
at Integral University, Lucknow, 06.06.2024
By Dr. Vinod Kumar KanvariaSouth African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)Academy of Science of South Africa
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
The Challenger.pdf DNHS Official Publication
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
Recently uploaded (20)
"Protectable subject matters, Protection in biotechnology, Protection of othe...
"Protectable subject matters, Protection in biotechnology, Protection of othe...
Delivering Micro-Credentials in Technical and Vocational Education and Training
Delivering Micro-Credentials in Technical and Vocational Education and Training
Digital Artifact 2 - Investigating Pavilion Designs
Digital Artifact 2 - Investigating Pavilion Designs
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp Network
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp Network
Landownership in the Philippines under the Americans-2-pptx.pptx
Landownership in the Philippines under the Americans-2-pptx.pptx
Normal Labour/ Stages of Labour/ Mechanism of Labour
Normal Labour/ Stages of Labour/ Mechanism of Labour
Advantages and Disadvantages of CMS from an SEO Perspective
Advantages and Disadvantages of CMS from an SEO Perspective
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
TOK Presentation
- 1. How to approach case studies And turn them into great presentations.
- 2. A contemporary issue: The basis for your presentation Choose a contemporary issue that you can relate to. If you have to spend 5 minutes explaining the situation / event to your audience – choose something else!!! What is the significance of this event for you the world, for your community, and for YOU as a knower.
- 3. Knowledge Claims What knowledge claims are you making about this event? i.e. What do you claim to know about it as the truth?
- 4. What is the basis for this knowledge claim? What evidence is there? What else do we know from AOK that might support this claim? What degree of certainty is there in this claim?
- 5. Counter-claims / different perspectives How could someone disagree with your claim or try to disprove it? (this forms a counter-claim.) What alternate ways could someone consider your claim? These alternative views are different perspectives – they do not directly try to disprove your claim.
- 6. What Knowledge Issues come out of your claims? What are the fundamental things you want to consider? This will mostly involve WOK and such words as: reliable, justify, evidence, certainty, truth, doubt, belief, knowledge / know They are very broad “umbrella” questions and should encourage evaluation: “To what extent………” is a good way to start a KI E.g. “To what extent can we be certain that reason gives us the truth in history?”
- 7. Knower’s Perspective Do you personally agree that this Knowledge Claim is justified? How do you come to this decision? What evidence do you use to reach this decision?
- 8. Validity of Knowledge Claims How valid are these knowledge claims in terms of determining the truth of what actually happened? Are they realistic claims with supporting evidence?