'The Birth Of Monsters' By Daniel Cohen's Argument?

For most writers, we must know the different types of argumentation styles along with logical fallacies. There are three main types of argumentation styles including: Aristotelian, Rogerian, and Toulmin. All three styles have their own argumentation spin on arguments. Aristotelian refutes the opposing claim while at the same time promoting its own argument by using supporting evidence. Some of that evidence includes using rhetorical appeals such as ethos, logos, and pathos. A Rogerian arguments are the arguments that find the common ground in order for an effective argument. Last but not least there is the Toulmin argument, the Toulmin argument is similar to the Aristotelian argument yet instead of appealing to the audience Toulmin focuses

This essay incorporates the idea about how mythological creatures or the birth of these monsters had happened. Cohen explains how mythological monsters were created due to our ancestors passing on these stories everywhere they traveled. Here in this quote Cohen talks about how these stories traveled, “These same Arab merchants traveled as far as China and carried the tale of the roc with them to the court of the Great Khan” (Cohen 137). Roc was one of the mythological characters that’s myth continued to live on at the time due to the spread of its tale. Although as Cohen writes his critical you can notice the argumentation style he uses. I feel as though he uses the Rogerian argument as well. Reviewing the Rogerian argument, this argument happens when the author finds common ground, then states how it affects both sides. And as the author is doing this, they’re also including their point of view while supporting it with

For example, “A search for the beginning of the stories of the griffin (or gryphon), that fearsome half lion, half eagle, is typically tangled. Most of us probably became acquainted with the griffin through Alice in Wonderland” (Cohen 135). Here Cohen starts out the search of the birth of the many mythological tales, and he makes common ground with the movie Alice in Wonderland. The reason I see this as part of a Rogerian argument is because Cohen starts to state the upcoming of the search for the “birth of monsters,” then he finds that common ground with the readers which is Alice in Wonderland. Cohen uses that as evidence because more than likely he knows a majority of the readers have seen that movie, or at least have heard of it. And if he is able to make the readers think about it, then he’s off to a great start. But with any work of literature there can be logical fallacies within the authors writing. Cohen’s argument has the logical fallacy of the circular argument. A circular argument is when the author restates the argument throughout their essay, yet does not prove it. My reaction to Cohen’s essay is that he was constantly talking about how he’s trying to find “the birth of monsters” tales yet all that was brought up was different mythological creatures. In addition to that, I just felt like he was talking in circles just a little