Kindly check the instructions.
Subject to argue : Social media impact on young adults
Â· IMPORTANT NOTE: this assignment is intended to be performed over the course of modules ‘The Building Blocks of Arguments’ and ‘Extended Argumentative Reconstruction’. I recommend writing the essay first and then doing the analytic steps as you get that material under your belt. ‘The Building Blocks of Arguments’ will give you what you need for the
annotations and ‘Extended Argumentative Reconstruction’ will prepare you for
arranging the argument in Standard Form and Diagram.
Â· Writing Assignment 1:
Â· Start by just
composing a 500 word essay arguing for some position (any position!) you want to (on any issue!).
Â· Advice/Request: make it something you honestly care about please! A good idea is to just use something youâ€™ve been thinking about recently, or perhaps had a conversation about. Also, you can write SUPER casually. This isnâ€™t a formal academic paper youâ€™re putting together.
Â· After you are done (donâ€™t do this along the way!),
annotate your own argument by looking for the following elements: Reason Markers (RM), Conclusion Markers (CM), Assuring (A), Discounting (D), Guarding (G), Positive Evaluative Terms (E+), Negative Evaluative Terms (E-).
Â· I want to see every use of these terms identified, not just a couple. Really pour over your writing and see what you naturally got!
Â· And finally
arrange your argument in Standard Form and
diagram the argument.
Â· Do NOT use the copy/paste method! Listen for the main appeals your argument is making â€“ what are the IDEAS you are presenting?
Â· Build the structure as you go â€“ start with the conclusion and work your way backwards through the lines of support.
Â· I will grade for
effort. To judge this I will look at 1) length and 2) richness (ex: Is there a lot of different points, or just one or two dragged out to 500 words?) This is also where Iâ€™ll be checking to make sure your essay is actually making arguments!
Â· 2 total points
Â· I will grade for
skill. I will be looking at your analysis and seeing how exhaustively you were able to analyze your own argument.
Â· 1.5 total points for the analysis
Â· 1.5 total points for the arranging in Standard Form/Diagramming
This page intentionally left blank
Robert J. Fogelin
An Introduction to Informal Logic
Australia â€¢ Brazil â€¢ Japan â€¢ Korea â€¢ Mexico â€¢ Singapore â€¢ Spain â€¢ United Kingdom â€¢ United States
An Introduction to Informal Logic,
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and
Robert J. Fogelin
Publisher/Executive Editor: Clark Baxter
Senior Sponsoring Editor: Joann Kozyrev
Associate Media Editor: Diane Akerman
Assistant Editor: Nathan Gamache
Editorial Assistant: Michaela Henry
Marketing Manager: Mark Haynes
Marketing Coordinator: Josh Hendrick
Manager: Kim Soltero
Project Manager, Editorial
Production: Abigail Greshik
Creative Director: Rob Hugel
Art Director: Faith Brosnan
Print Buyer: Betsy Donaghey
Permissions Editors: Scott Bragg/
Karyn L. Morrison
Production Service: Pre-PressPMG
Photo Researcher: John Hill
Copy Editor: Pre-PressPMG
Cover Designer: RHDG
Cover Image: Getty Images/Stella Salazar
For product information and technology assistance,
contact us at Cengage Learning
Academic Resource Center, 1-800-423-0563.
For permission to use material from this text or
product, submit all requests online at
Further permissions questions can be emailed to
Â© 2010, 2005 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by
the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted,
stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic,
electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to
photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web
distribution, information networks, or information storage
and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section
107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act,
without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2008939692
Wadsworth Cengage Learning
10 Davis Drive
Belmont, CA 94002-3098
Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by
Nelson Education, Ltd.
For your course and learning solutions, visit
Purchase any of our products at your local college store or
at our preferred online store www.ichapters.com.
See page 123 for the stages in argumentative analysis
1) Do a
close analysis of the passage containing the argument
2) List all explicit premises and the conclusion in
Â· Step 1 (from last time): identify argument markers and compose a list of explicit assumptions and the conclusion
Â· Step 2: remove irrelevant claims (claims whose truth has no bearing on the truth of the conclusion) and repeated claims (why clutter up the argument with different wordings of the same claim)
Â· With repeated claims, pick the wording that is most unambiguous and clear to include in your account
Â· Step 3: check to see if assurances and guarding terms can be omitted from the explicit argument
Â· Assurances: is the assurance intended to contribute to the argument?
Â· This isnâ€™t always true, but generally
appeals to authority will need to be retained in the argument
while commenting or expressing the strength of our belief in a claim is usually not a claim that must be retained. The last method of assuring,
conversationally implying reasons, depends entirely on the context and the implication.
Â· Guarding: the question to ask here is whether the guarding move actually defines the scope of the claim being guarded. Consider:
Â· â€œIt seems reasonable to think that Meredith is off of work by now, so she can give us a ride to the partyâ€
Â· In this case it isnâ€™t the â€œreasonablenessâ€ of the belief that entails that Meredith can give a ride. It would be the truth of the fact that she is out of work by now.
Â· Think of the â€œreasonablenessâ€ term here referring to why we should
allow this premise, not what the premise is
Â· â€œMeredith can probably give us a ride to the party since sheâ€™s probably off of work by nowâ€
Â· Here the conclusion is being guarded in the sense that it would be possible to make the stronger claim: â€œMeredith is able to give us a ride to the partyâ€. The â€œprobablyâ€ here cannot be omitted without changing what the argument is about.
Â· Generally (but not always!), it is less likely you should drop the guarding terms for conclusions than you should for premises.
Â· EXERCISE 1
Clarify the premises and the conclusion where necessary
Â· As the book points out, this is a less than perfect ideal.
Â· What does clarifying mean?
Â· Reducing ambiguity and vagueness from the claims themselves (with this step weâ€™re just trying to get clear on what is being claimed)
Â· Sometimes this means rewording, sometimes providing a definition, sometimes using common terms throughout the argument when they are intended that way
Â· When and why should we do this?
Â· This is tricky to t
Why Choose Us
- 100% non-plagiarized Papers
- 24/7 /365 Service Available
- Affordable Prices
- Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
- Will complete your papers in 6 hours
- On-time Delivery
- Money-back and Privacy guarantees
- Unlimited Amendments upon request
- Satisfaction guarantee
How it Works
- Click on the “Place Your Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
- Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
- Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
- Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
- From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.