There are many different sources in the literary world; however, not all of them are reliable or credible. When called upon to write, writers should be very careful in choosing a worthy source. Using trustworthy and credible sources can really help one’s writing, but on the other hand, using non-credible sources can greatly harm a written work. Writers must evaluate carefully to avoid using unreliable sources. The best way to evaluate a source is to review the background information, check that it is free of logical fallacies, and verify that it agrees with other sources. The first step in evaluating a source is to assess the source’s background information. This information plays a major role in determining the credibility of the source …show more content…
According to Purdue OWL, “fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument” (Weber & Brizee, 2013, para. 1). Logical fallacies are inappropriate in scholarly writing and should always be avoided. They make the source’s argument much less reliable and persuasive, which is why writers should train themselves to spot logical fallacies in their writing and other people’s writings (Weber & Brizee, 2013, para. 1). When sources have logical fallacies, it leads readers to distrust and disregard the argument or statement. Consequently, when writers use these unreliable sources, their own argument is handicapped and impaired. The UNC college writing center states that “fallacies are defects that weaken arguments. By learning to look for them in your own and others’ writing, you can strengthen your ability, to evaluate the arguments you make, read, and hear” (UNC College, n.d., para. 7). If writers use sources that contain logical fallacies, then the fallacies are transferred to their own work, even though they did not state it themselves. This makes it extremely imperative to avoid sources with logical fallacies. When logical fallacies are present, the writing appears unreliable and unreasonable, which leads readers to distrust the writing. By examining sources for logical fallacies, writers can ensure that they are using …show more content…
This process is called cross-checking. Writers should never use inaccurate information or evidence in their writing, because it will falsely mislead their audience. By cross-checking sources, writers can avoid misleading their audience and ensure that they are using sources with correct information. According to Beeghly Library, an important question to ask is, “Does the information in this resource agree with other resources you have found and your own personal knowledge?” (Beeghly Library, 2017, para. 4). Writers are expected to always use accurate and relevant information in their writing, so it is necessary to make sure that all of their sources contain factual information. To ensure that a source has accurate information, writers should specifically search for different sources on the same topic to compare the information. Contradicting sources are a clear warning sign that one of the sources could be incorrect. By following this process, writers can be assured that their source is safe to use in their writing. In addition to misleading their audience with false information, using inaccurate sources can be embarrassing and detrimental to the writing. When readers read something that contains incorrect, false information, they immediately assume that the author is unreliable and untrustworthy, which can ultimately harm the writer’s reputation and career. So, to avoid this, writers should be sure
In this day and age, writing is being portrayed through various mediums, such as film and television. Some of those portrayals depict writing as both good and bad depending on the situation that is present. Authors such as, by E. Shelley Reid, Kevin Roozen, and Anne Lamott all write about important writing concepts that are being depicted in films, like Freedom Writers. The film Freedom Writers shows a positive and accurate portrayal of writing in the sense that the writers should have a connection to what they are writing about, writing is a form of communication, and that writing does not have to be perfect the first time.
The authors seems trustworthy in the sense that they bring in their own thought. The readers are able to follow without much confusion.
To start off with, we need to look for any obvious factors associated with the documentation that could affect the accuracy of the document. In the case of 'The Long Shadow of Little Rock' one of these obvious factors would be that this documentation was written by the victim. Now this factor is a double edged sword, Elizabeth could either be brutally honest about her plight (in the hope that somebody would listen), or she could exaggerate what actually happened in an attempt to shock the reader and in turn gain attention and support in the form of a higher authority.
Having the author’s purpose is vital to knowing how informative, opinionated, or factual the arti...
... a false belief, rather than a sure fire finding. Overall writers can be misleading society, which causes them to be a potentially destructive person of society.
Over the years, writing has been used as an art form, allowing people to write their thoughts. Though, the most torrential puzzle of writing is the reasoning behind the words on a page. The logic behind any piece of literature falls into categories of wants and needs. There are three essays to which these categories are explained in further detail with more depth. Firstly, “Not So Deadly Sin” which focuses on the act of lying and exaggeration.
An author’s main focus when writing a nonfiction piece is to persuade its audience of their beliefs, using claims to support them. With the effect of close consideration of claims and fallacies when reading non-fiction, the author is unable to persuade the reader due to inaccurate statements made by the author himself. The fallacies detected by a close reader discredits the author as well as their piece.
The Chicago critic Wayne Booth in his book Rhetoric of Fiction first coined the terms reliable and unreliable narrator. These terms have been of notable importance in narratological (analysis of narratives) studies ever since Booth’s book was first published in 1961. Booth defines the reliable and unreliable narrator in the following way: “I have called a narrator reliable when he speaks for or acts in accordance with the norms of the work (which is to say the implied author’s norms), unreliable when he does not” (Booth 158-59). In other words, when a narrator expresses values and perceptions that strikingly diverge from those of the author, he is deemed to be an unreliable narrator (Olson 93). Once the narrator has been deemed unreliable, then the narrator’s unreliability will be consistent throughout the rest of the work (Booth 158).
Authors and speakers alike use some type of persuasion on their intended audience. They often try to make you agree with their argument before considering other factors. Persuasive writing often has a copious amount of logical fallacies, defined by the Perdue Online Writing Lab as “errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic”, despite that they tend to have success with sympathetic audiences. Wendell Berry’s essay “The Whole Horse” is an example. Berry is likely to persuade his conservationist audience because of his use of emotive language.
There are certain criteria that must be fulfilled in order for a nonfiction book to be successful. The two criteria that we should judge all argumentative nonfiction by are well written anecdotes that capture the reader’s attention and well explained factual data that proves the author’s point. The book Lies My Teacher Told Me by James W. Loewen contains both of these criteria and as such is a successful nonfiction book. Loewen’s purpose in writing Lies My Teacher Told Me is to correct the inaccuracies in textbooks and to help students learn the truth about history. He uses anecdotes that provide insight about history and data that easily proves his point about inaccuracies in textbooks to achieve his goal of helping students gain knowledge.
A straw-man fallacy misrepresents a position of the opposing side in an argument. It usually does so in such way that the opposing side seems to be ridiculously exaggerated or blown out of proportion or simply false. As an example people that think that gun ownership is wrong and needs to be controlled or banned altogether have no respect for the rights of gun owners. They treat them all as gun toting nut cases. That’s wrong. People must have the right to own a gun if they so choose.
Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the reasoning of your argument. Fallacies have different types like (Begging the Claim, Ad hominem, Straw Man and more.), and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim. A writer or speaker is to avoid these common fallacies in their arguments and watch for them in the arguments of others. Learning to identify and avoid fallacies is crucial for professional in all fields of life literature, science, politics etc. for the simple reason of getting one’s point across to the listener or the viewer in a broader definition. Even in an artistic sense if a script or a song contains fallacies, it will not be convincing hence forth it won’t be appealing
Are assertions in the source based on reliable evidence? Are sources cited? How are you able to tell? They do list where they get their info from within the paragraphs or quotes.
Not just to stick with being as close to the truth as possible, but to be able to pick out and differentiate oneself from those who would have these other agendas, being able to identify what makes a quality source is greatly important. As varied as sources are, ranging from pictures to print, from articles to recordings, there is no single way to algorithmically verify a source. There is, however, a handful of good questions to answer about a given piece of information. As Cornell
In their essay, ‘The Intentional Fallacy’ (1946), William K. Wimsatt Jr. and Monroe C. Beardsley, two of the most eminent figures of the New Criticism school of thought of Literary Criticism, argue that the ‘intention’ of the author is not a necessary factor in the reading of a text.