Go back to the editorial or the op-ed piece that you blogged about this past weekend and generate an argument that somehow disagrees with or opposes the original argument. (Try to do this regardless of your own personal opinion just as an exercise in reasoning.) First, see if you can identify a commonplace or a major premise within the original argument that you think could be debated. Rewrite the commonplace in such a way that you can develop it to support your opposing argument. Then, construct a new enthymeme that you think could be the basis for it. Last, draft a 250 word letter to the editor that presents your argument in a persuasive way. Please emphasize the appeal to logos in your argument, but feel free to add other persuasive appeals if you think they will enhance your logical proof.
For example, if I wanted to argue against the initial enthymeme that I started our discussion with—that the perpetrators of 9/11 ought to be defeated—I might start with a commonplace that since evil cannot ever be defeated, it ought to be forgiven. My enthymeme might look something like this:
* Major premise: People who commit evil actions ought to be forgiven.
* Minor premise: The perpetrators of 9/11 committed evil actions.
* Conclusion: The perpetrators ought to be forgiven for their evil actions.
If I were to develop this argument, I think we all might agree that in this case, I would have to expend much persuasive energy in convincing my audience of my major premise and that the perpetrators of 9/11 committed the kind of evil action that can be forgiven.
Post your response here as a comment and be prepared to discuss it with the rest of class.
The major premise of your article is that the laws on snow shoveling weaken the already weak neighborhood relationships. This assumes that laws and community life is linked. This is false because people should not want to shovel their walk because the law says they have to do it. They should want to shovel their walks to that people can go about their daily lives. Everyone should be like the major players and want to go out as soon as it snows with their neighbors and shovel together in order to get their neighborhood up and running again. Wanting to get to know their neighbors and the others in their community and helping them out should motivate them. If people want to do their shoveling for their neighbors and their community, then there is no reason for laws about snow shoveling. People would have much stronger neighborly connections if they did this for each other and not because the government is telling them to do it.
ReplyDeleteSave the Dome? Everyone who has lived in Colorado, or currently lives in Colorado has seen the capital building. It resigns in downtown Denver and houses our state and local government officials. While it is an important building, it has seen betters days and is falling apart. Like all great things, they must come to an end. Recently, the dome on the capital building has been eroding away putting the citizens who work and live near the capital in danger. In 2007, a ten-pound chunk of concrete fell of the dome of the building forcing the city to close that section of the sidewalk. While this is an appropriate course of action, it may only be the beginning of a terrible disaster. In a state where the weather can change in a second, Mother Nature has proved to be destructive. After years of service, there is no need to replace the dome. With costs in the range of 12 million dollars, that is money the city or state cannot afford to waste on aesthetic looks. The states budget is roughly one billion dollars, and shrinking. A billion may sound like a lot, but in a state of five million citizens, there isn’t enough to go around. Money needs to spend on schools, public safety, and other social and economic issues, not on making a building look pretty. With such heavy costs, it seems cheaper and safer to build a new capital, which is functional, safe, and pleasing to the eye. In these hard times, there is no need to waste money on a dome, which serves no purpose other than looking pretty.
ReplyDeleteIf you were just getting out of jail, you might be worried about how you were going to get back on your feet and create a new life for yourself. Although you might think that people that were in jail for drug crimes should probably not get involved in the business again, making it illegal for ex-felon’s to own medical marijuana dispensaries might not be beneficial. If they were in jail for drug crimes, we can assume that they are fairly knowledgeable about the effects of marijuana on the body. We would also like to assume that felons have the ability to rethink their lives while in jail and come out with a clean slate. Although they do have the felony on their record, it doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a chance to get back on their feet. Also considering the number of ex-felons there are in the state, we can’t make assumptions that they would all want to open dispensaries. Instead of completely banning them from opening dispensaries, we might make it so they have to go through a little bit longer of a process to get the licenses and permits to open it up. I think that they should be allowed to open up businesses and better themselves, no matter what it takes.
ReplyDeleteMajor Premise: Individuals should not benefit from government if they do not contribute financially and legally.
ReplyDeleteMinor Premise: Illegal immigrants do not pay taxes.
Conclusion: Illegal immigrants should not receive in-state tuition.
Illegal immigrants crossing the border is a problem that is extremely prevalent in today’s society. America has tried to regulate and counteract this, but it is still a recurring problem. Individuals who illegally cross borders to live in our country cheat their way out of paying taxes and contributing to our government. These people should not benefit from state funds or in-state tuition for colleges. They should not be able to profit from a government that they don’t give to. Regardless of how long they have lived in this country or when they first came, these students are still living in our country illegally. Some may argue that when these students came they were still young children or babies and did not have a say in the decision. Despite their age, these individuals are still living in the country illegally and should not benefit from our country’s taxes. There is a strong line between the debate of what is right and what is wrong. The laws in our country should be adhered to without question. Therefore, if someone is living in our country illegally, there should be no ethical reason to allow them to benefit from in-state tuition for college.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission should force Xcel to implement the new power lines in Southern Colorado. The 140 mile long lines will be supplied with renewable energy and push a tremendous amount of power from the valley between Pueblo and Alamosa. Even though the lines may be an eye sore to the people living in these areas, the lines will make power more reliable in Southern Colorado. Also, the project will be beneficial economically because Xcel will be paying Colorado $180 million. Even though Xcel originally promised 1,129 megawatts of power and are now saying only 60 megawatts of power will be produced, some power is better than nothing. If the people in southern Colorado are freezing because of a lack of power then these lines are more important than the beautiful landscape. This is narrowing down to a power reliability problem which could become more threatening to survival in the future. In addition, this power is renewable energy and with our current concerns regarding natural resource preservation, Coloradans should be more than happy to see these lines constructed. These lines will push solar energy to remote areas of the state which shouldn’t even be an argument if Colorado is truly a “green” conscientious state.
ReplyDeleteThe major premise of this editorial is that governors should not hide their cell phone records, the citizens deserve a transparent state government. The minor premise is that governors do not deserve a large amount of secrecy. The conclusion is that Governor Hickenlooper is showing a great deal of respect to the citizens of Colorado because he is sharing his phone records to the best of his ability. He wants the citizens to know what is going on and not feel like their governor is lying to them or doing things behind their back. The commonplace is between the difference of governor Ritter and Hickenloopers thoughts on government secrecy and the availability of cell phone records. Ritter (the old governor) completely shut off all records of his cell phone by only using his personal cell phone and not the government phone. But Hickenlooper uses both his personal and government. He also promised that even though his personal cell phone records cant be brought out, he will have a neutral overlooker to make sure he is not doing anything skeptical. The difference between the two governors creates a commonplace, since they are two different extremes of government transparency.
ReplyDeleteThe major premise of the editorial In-state tuition for all students is that we should not reward people who break the law. Illegal immigrants are breaking the law, and at the same they are being rewarded through their education. The editor argues that children should not suffer for the actions of their parents. The reality is, they need to. Children are the images of their parents and while they learn their fundaments through their parents they are a part of society. Either way, both the children and their parents are breaking the law. It is hard to pinpoint children for their actions because they are still young, but regardless the law is the law. Illegal immigrants are sneaking across the border to take the opportunities available in America. They should not be able to receive the education available in Colorado in high school to start. So why should they be able to pay only in state tuition when they don’t even pay taxes? Illegal immigration is usually frowned upon by Americans. Coming into this country illegally is breaking the law, therefore they should not be able to pay for in-state tuition in Colorado.
ReplyDeleteMajor premise: The medical marijuana industry requires knowledge of the drug.
ReplyDeleteMinor premise: Previously convicted drug felons know about drugs.
Conclusion: Previously convicted felons should be allowed to run medical marijuana dispensaries.
Medical marijuana dispensaries outnumber Starbucks locations in Denver, but for whatever reason, we don’t really care who our local barista is; what about our local cannabis providers? How much do our current sellers really know about the different forms of marijuana in comparison to a previous drug dealer? Of course there are some illegal dealers on the streets who don’t know the first thing about the drug they sell, however there are plenty of convicted dealers who do know about the drug they sell and the different forms thereof. For those applying to be medical marijuana dispensers, it can be tricky to obtain all required aspects of the job in order to obtain the license. Let’s give appropriate training to previously convicted drug felons so that they may successfully and legally contribute to those who are in need of medical marijuana. In a well-monitored industry, there is no reason for a previously convicted drug dealer who is knowledgeable about the product should not enjoy the job of dispensing legal drugs.
This editorial is very much praising Hickenlooper especially when compared to the previous governor, Ritter. The major premise in this article is that government officials should be transparent. Hickenlooper should not be praised for being transparent. He decided that he would use two separate phones, one for business and one for personal, where the public will be able to see exactly what is going on in his business phone and someone will be over seeing his personal phone. Hickenlooper`s decision to be transparent to the public; should not be praised. Hickenlooper`s decision should just be expected. What does this say about other government officials? Shouldn’t this decision be expected from all officials? Even with Hickenlooper`s decision there are still ways he could get around government policies and be sneaky.
ReplyDeleteWho says that immunization is a good thing for people? There is a more natural solution to becoming immune to ailments than getting a needle pushed into your skin. Parents aren’t trying to harm their children when they don’t give them immunizations. When children are exposed to these sicknesses, they can build a natural immunity. Nothing can replace natural immunity to diseases. It strengthens the immune system. When society becomes too enthralled with technology and new “things”, we lose things that are the most important. We lose things that nature intended, things like harmony and community. Things become less personal when your communication is given from a speaker and a microphone. Nature has a way of cleaning things up, after all of the cards of hit the table. After all, people survived the flu without taking a flu shot.
ReplyDeleteThe article I chose the other day was about Colorado's landfill and how the amount of garbage is decreasing.
ReplyDeleteMajor premise: This is making the economy go down because there is not as much money going around for the jobs. People don't have to work as much.
Minor premise:People are losing money
Conclusion:Even though it is a positive our landfills are not receiving a lot of garbage, it is effecting Denver's economy
major premise: Oil barrels could hit $200 a barrel.
ReplyDeleteminor premise: Due to those oil prices, gas will raise to a ridiculous price.
conclusion: Oil prices skyrocketing will very much affect transportation.
Oil prices could possibly be approaching an alarming rate, 200 dollars a gallon. In turn, this will raise gas prices to easily over 3 dollars a gallon, which we all know would be an epic disappointment. Many people think we have ourselves to owe because we have become fossil fuel tycoons and are throwing our economy and our environment in the back seat, which is pretty sad. But, at the same time, alot of what people enjoy and need in order to survive, somehow create fossil fuels. Everyone, China, India, and a lot of other places are in demand of oil. It almost feels like the rest of the world is catching up to America and our demands for energy and many other recourses. Should we expect that other countries live lesser lives than us to save the world? We need to all get on an even keel when it comes to living standards demands.
The article wrote about if some bad things happen to your life, don’t be stuck in line, you need to keep moving. I do believe that if something happen, you can choose another way to go through instead of keep moving. For example, my ex boyfriend broke up with me and find a new girlfriend immediately. How can I go through it? People told me that it just take time. I know, but I just can’t forget everything. Therefore, I try to make more friends and hang out with my friends. I am not facing the problem that still has. I just try another way which is not that hurt me to go through it. Also, I talked with my mom, and my mom said it is just a little story for my life. After several years, when I look back then I can keep moving, and would not be stuck in line. Therefore, I think keep moving sometimes is hard to go through, so how about just stop it and do something else.
ReplyDelete