Dalla Casa used Ad Hominem and hast generalization when she stated, " Too often I hear people equate property with laziness or worst criminal behavior and its heart-wrenching for me on a deeply personal leave." She used Ad hominem which attacked her rather than her argument and hast generalization which rush to conclusions before the reader had all the facts. Another example of Dalla Casa using logical fallacies is " very few children enjoy the conversation, love, companionship, and connection we had." The last statement was the use of bandwagon because the claim is basically saying this is correct simply because it is what most everyone is coming to believe. The weaknesses in Dalla casa article did take away from the overall
Velazquez concludes that “from clothes to computers… , no American child is immune from the underlying suggestion that owning these things defines success. While the message of excess materialism is toxic for all our children, it is especially cruel for the one out of six American children living in the poverty” (769). The phrase “no American child” indicates that Velazquez is biased when she discusses large corporations’ influences on children. Her tone suggests that she is against material possessions. She finds them toxic and that is how she draws her comparison to the toxicity of the corporations. This use of rhetoric conveys that Velazquez exaggerates the negative effect of large corporations’ products. She ignores the initial purpose, when these large corporations invent technology, is to make people’s lives more convenient and help people to sort their problems, which can only be done with machines. The location of waste seems like a minor issue in comparison to all the great benefits that come with the products of these large
In the article “Dude You’re a Fag: Adolescent Homophobia” the author uses pathos and logos to convey the audience the main point of her article. Rhetorical modes such as exemplification and description are used. C.J. Pascoe is trying to argue that the word “fag” or “faggot is not mainly used as a homophobic slur within high school boys, but more commonly used to describe unmasculinity.
"The Logic of Stupid Poor People" is the idea of purchasing high dollar items to make them feel like they are a part of the higher class. Tressie McMillan Cottom, the author of this blog post, feels that most of the lower class is stupid because they make bad financial decisions. In Cottom's essay, she discusses how she grew up with a family that was poor and it was difficult to "make ends meet"; moreover, helping others. Cottom's thesis says, "If you are poor, why do you spend money on useless luxuries rather than trying to survive". The argument that she is trying to get across is that the more responsible way to spend your money could be towards the next electric bill, groceries, or even into the bank in case of an emergency. Cottom mentions that her mother used to spend her money on clothing and accessories for herself as "investments", but it was for her mother's way to show others that she has extra cash to blow, even though she does not. Cottom has the evidence from her own personal experiences; ways that her family made money was taking advantage of welfare, collecting from insurance policies, and extra military payments. The author is making a point why the act of spending
Chesler make many compelling persuasive arguments; however, a few logical fallacies appear in her line of thinking.
However, the good is outweighed by the bad in that this article has almost no factual support. Worley seems to be venting her thoughts without any outside factual support. It is difficult to label this article as effective due to the lack of any factual support and evidence to back up her arguments. That is exactly what needs to change in the article. Worley must use more sources for information to back up her points, then the article may be more convincing and worth
“A Modest Proposal” was written in 1729 by a satirical author by the name of Jonathan Swift. Swift studied at the University of Oxford and was also know for his popular writing in Gulliver’s Travel. The purpose for his satire “A Modest Proposal” was to enlighten the citizens of Ireland about their hardship and suffering. He informed them about their scares of food, money, and property, but provided a possible solution to their problem. To persuade the people Swift adopts a comforting and friendly tone to his audience for the people to react to his solution.
“A Modest Proposal” and “Let Them Eat Dog” have a common argument that we are dealing with over population of humans and animals. Swift uses satire to make us think that he really wants us to eat babies. Foer tells us of people eating animals were not accustomed to. This can put an economical strain on everyone if we don’t use our resources wisely. Both of these articles may be elusive for some to read. Both papers touch on the topics of eating animals, economic issues, and culture.
Pollan’s article provides a solid base to the conversation, defining what to do in order to eat healthy. Holding this concept of eating healthy, Joe Pinsker in “Why So Many Rich Kids Come to Enjoy the Taste of Healthier Foods” enters into the conversation and questions the connection of difference in families’ income and how healthy children eat (129-132). He argues that how much families earn largely affect how healthy children eat — income is one of the most important factors preventing people from eating healthy (129-132). In his article, Pinsker utilizes a study done by Caitlin Daniel to illustrate that level of income does affect children’s diet (130). In Daniel’s research, among 75 Boston-area parents, those rich families value children’s healthy diet more than food wasted when children refused to accept those healthier but
In the article “Homeless” Anna Quindlen states that people without homes are being discriminated and stereotyped as the homeless. She uses personal knowledge and examples to build her argument. Anna Quindlen states that people in America think that they know that a shelter is best for them, but emotional and physical issues can make the homeless not want to go to these shelters. I always used to think that they should be in a shelter, too, but like most Americans I never really thought about what is preventing them from going. I agree with Anna Quindlen’s points that people with homes do not know what’s best for the people without one and that they are not the homeless if they had a home before, but
basic charge of this criticism can be stated in the words of a recent critic,
Gun control is a controversial issue that currently has no easy solution to please everyone. In an article written by Adam Winkler, a professor from the UCLA School of Law, he states that open carry is the answer to having fewer guns on the streets. His argument fails because it contains false premises throughout the article and is also inductively weak. First, he commits the slippery slope fallacy by assuming a series of events will occur for doing one action. Second, he commits the bandwagon fallacy. The fact that other states have the open carry law in effect does not make his argument true nor does it make it a valid reason. Last, he neglects how there will always be people who do not follow laws. Gun control in the United States has been a difficult topic for many people to discuss, but Winkler’s point of view of the topic does not give a complete thought about why people should agree with him.
Throughout the semester, we were assigned five essays. Beginning with paper one, a summary response, we were expected to provide our audience with a brief summary followed by our response to it. I began my paper with a question as the hook, and then I provided the author’s claim. Afterwards, I gave a sentence worth of information about what the article is about and then presented my thesis. My brainstorming process was minimal. Honestly, I did not tackle much on following the writing process. I read the article and began to write accordingly to the assignment sheet. My grade on the essay obviously reflected on that due to no proofreading or revising. There were errors amongst my format, such as, heading and font. As far as feedback, Armstrong
...e are a consumer society and we are driven by images. I think it is a problem the way higher class people use this to improve their fortunes and slowly killing our economy. I agree with Debord on about all of the points he made. I don’t find myself caught up in this consumer society for the most part, but I can see how it grips certain people and it gets to the point where it defines them. I believe that Debord dislikes the new society, so I wish he would have come out and said more negative things about the consumerism. The way Debord states individual points rather than a single theory is interesting because he can jump from one point to another without adhering to certain factors. This allows him to look at things from many different angles, which is important when you’re talking about the world, which is very complex and is comprised of many different variables.
Somebody says criminal is bad people. Is it true? If it is true, this could be a form of fallacy. Fallacy is a misconception leads to unreasonable argument or disbelief in people's ideas. It happens with us everyday. Fallacy has many types and I want to refer to one of them: Ad Hominem. It is a judgment about people's appearance than the validity of their ideas, abilities, or work We usually see this fallacy in our life like politic, demonstration, even in our working environment. For example: politicians use others personal lives in debate to disqualify their opponents' arguments or use races to deny people's right to work or bosses use their experiences to judge their employees' work progress So we need to understand how Ad Hominem fallacy is used and how to avoid them.
In the story, The Glorious Whitewasher, Tom Sawyer uses two distinct strategies to deceive the other children into whitewashing the fence for him. First, Tom ignores the presence of Ben upon his arrival: ‘Tom went on whitewashing- paid no attention to the steamboat.’ While talking to Ben about the work he is doing Tom also does not acknowledge Ben directly but instead makes it appear that the whitewashing is more interesting. “‘O, come, now, you don’t mean to let on that you like it?’ The brush continued to move.” This persistent disregard of Ben while looking interested in his work causes Ben to marvel over the idea that whitewashing may just be fun. The second strategy Tom Sawyer uses is reverse psychology. Reverse psychology is when someone discusses the opposite of their needs to accomplish the outcome they really desire.