Blog assignment numero 3

1. Explain what “to give an argument” means in this book.

To give an argument is a way to prove one's point, or idea, by way of presenting relevant reasons and or premises. Using a combination of common knowledge, statistics and facts to form a relevant and reasonable conclusion. Not a verbal fist fight.

2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?

Arguments are essential because they help us find logical conclusions to life's many problems. The argument can show us the strengths of beliefs such as, gravity is impartial, and the weaknesses in beliefs like, the earth is flat. Without arguments we would have no way to reach the most logical conclusion and would thus be thrust into a world of flimsy ideas and many irregularities.

3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.

Most students write essays because that is what they know. The papers that were written in High school were linear, and simply regurgitated facts learned and studied upon. The argument requires substantial reasons to prove a point, or support a belief. It is this that students seem to have difficulty with, as they are just used to writing a different way.

4. Construct two short arguments (one "for" and one "against") as modeled in the Week 3 Assignment section in Blackboard. Put each one in "elements form".

"For riding a bicycle at night"

-Should one ride a bicycle at night?
-Yes one should ride a bicycle at night.
-one should ride a bicycle at night because
it is cool to be out at night.
it is fun to dodge cars.
it is cool to have a little headlight.

"Against riding a bicycle at night"

-Should one ride a bicycle at night?
- No one should not ride a bicycle at night.
-One should not ride a bicycle at night because
It is pointless, you should stay home.
it is hard to see.
it is easy to die, by way of not dodging the cars.
5. Review the seven rules in chapter one. Briefly discuss how your argument demonstrates that each rule was applied, in the construction of your arguments above.

The premises and conclusion were quite explicitly seperated in the argument as the arguments e
assumed a sort of list form.
The arguments followed a logical progression, moving from conclusion to premises, and keeping the premises together.
The premises in my arguments are fairly strong, subject to one's opinion of what is fun at times , but mostly true.
My arguments are concise and direct. Not drawn out at all, and not too vague.
My arguments are not too wordy, they are simply executed and are not loaded down with big words.
The aruments use consistent language i suppose. in my opinion they are a bit too simple to fully incorporate the rule of consistent language.
My arguments use terms that have consistent meanings, and are easy to understand.


6. Review the three rules in the appendix named, “Definitions”. In your own words, discuss how you took these rules into consideration as you constructed your arguments.

The first rule was to be specific with definitions, create concise defintinions for broad terms. I considered this when I elaborated on how one would die. i could take the rule into more consideration and define cool as well.

I really dont have any debatable terms, besides cool. cool could be contested in a few ways, like who defines cool, what is cool and why does cool matter. This could be solved if one chose a new term or could determine what is generally cool, what is not cool and if i could specify the difference.

I did not let my terms and definitions of those terms prove my point completely. Though they aided, they did not prove my point on their own. i also used the facts behind the definitions to help prove my conclusions.