DC - Pearson Good Reasons - Ch. 1, 8, 2

Of these choices which best aligns with the text's definition of argument

• An opinion

• An opinion that's persuasive

• A contested opinion that relies primarily on gut-level emotional reactions.

• A controversial claim supported with evidence, reasoning, and analysis.

Arguing in the interest of the audience, being honest about one's argumentative goals, and open about your sources are characteristics of...

• Rogerian argument.

• traditional argument.

• ethical and responsible argument

• inverted argument

Which of the following lines of questions are best suited to guiding research to directly support an argument's claim?

• What level of formality will be most appropriate for my venue/publication? Will my audience be impressed or confused by advanced diction?

• What are the major discourse communities that compose my audience? What background experiences may stand between me and my audience?

• What ordering will best communicate my ideas to the audience? Should I lead with my thesis in the introduction or build to it and state it in the conclusion?

• "What do I need to learn about this issue? Who are well-known experts on this issue? What information might need to be corroborated by experts and trusted authorities?

Tags

CCSS.RI.1.4

CCSS.RI.2.1

CCSS.RI.3.1

CCSS.RL.2.1

CCSS.RL.3.1

Inquiry in the context of argumentation often serves which of the following purposes?

• Creating journals that help authors record their thoughts and feelings about topics for both expository and persuasive writing?

• Generating lines of questions that can lead to constructing strong claims/thesis statements, guiding research, and helping to formulate strong supporting details.

• It has little use in guiding thesis writing or support, but can be used to respond too counterarguments.

• Trick question: Inquiry can serve no substantial purpose in formulating arguments.

Tags

CCSS.RI.2.1

CCSS.RI.3.1

CCSS.RL.1.1

CCSS.RL.2.1

CCSS.RL.3.1

Showing regard for your opposition's position and thinking of argument as winning allies instead of defeating foes...

• help one argue respectfully but generate a unassertive tone.

• create a tone of disrespect

• do not affect argumentative tone.

• help one argue respectfully and generate a moderate tone.

Which of the following best explains a claim of fact or definition?

• An examination of the conventional use of a word or reporting of a general truth as given by most major dictionaries or encyclopedias.

• The creation of an individual meaning of a word or interpretation of an event that does not conflict with other interpretations.

• Rewording established meanings or accepted truths in an original way.

• Arguing for a particular interpretation or a word, event, or phenomenon that asserts to be more valid than competing interpretations.

The term coined when a claim of definition is argued for within a particular context for matters of practicality. (This type of definition claim is often debated in STEM and soft sciences fields as part of research).

• Formal definition

• Operational definition

• Defining from example

• Extended definition

A method of developing a claim of definition when specific wording or criteria are inadequate and instead instances of the claim are given from experience.

• Formal definition claims

• Operational definition claims

• Definitions from example

• Working definitions

Which of the following do claims of definition and claims of value have in common besides being argumentative?

• They both inherently engage with elements of quality.

• They have an equal focus on questions of moral vs. immoral or good vs. bad.

• They both fundamentally concern themselves with arriving at definitive interpretations of facts or concepts.

• They both set out criteria (definitive criteria in the former and quality criteria in the latter)

Which is the strongest presentation of a thesis statement for a claim of fact/definition?

• Even if an A.I. were able to demonstrate sentience or mimic it beyond a distinguishable level, it is not a person.

• Even if an A.I. were able to demonstrate sentience or mimic it beyond typical a distinguishable level, it is not, in my opinion, a person.

• As I interpret "person-hood," an A.I. cannot gain the status of a person even if it passes a Turing Test.

• Computers ain't people.