In this blog post, I will be considering which types of arguments that I will be using for my public argument in Project 3.
There are two types of arguments that I am considering for my Public Argument project.The first being the Causal Argument. The Causal Argument, "introduces your argument to the causes of a specific problem or phenomenon in our society" (Writing Public Lives, 414). This is what I plan to do in my writing for Project 3. Additionally, the book states, "by pointing to the cause, you are able to also help your audience understand the potential solutions to the controversy" (Writing Public Lives, 414).
I am also considering the Evaluative Argument for my writing in Project 3. The Evaluative Argument "evaluates the successfulness of a specific policy, idea, solution to a problem, etc." (Writing Public Lives, 414). Both of these argument types would work with my public argument because I plan to explain the problems and causes of problems that Rolling Stone had with their original UVA rape article as well as evaluate the solutions that SPJ's Code of Ethics for professional journalism provides.
Reflection:
After reading and replying to Jenny and Rachel's blog posts on "My Rhetorical Action Plan" and "Considering Types", I have found that we all have a pretty good idea of which argument type best suits what we are trying to achieve in our own arguments. Also, after discussing the different types of arguments in class, I realized that the evaluative argument wouldn't work for my project. A more effective alternative to the causal argument would be the refutation argument. This is because I want to point out the mistakes that Rolling Stone made and explain why they were wrong and why what they thought was okay to publish actually wasn't. Below I have provided the links to Jenny and Rachel's blog posts that I was referring to in my reflection.
Jenny:
"My Rhetorical Action Plan"
"Considering Types"
Rachel:
"My Rhetorical Action Plan"
"Considering Types"
 |
| (2010) "Men Arguing" via Flickr Attribution 2.0 Generic License |
I am also considering the Evaluative Argument for my writing in Project 3. The Evaluative Argument "evaluates the successfulness of a specific policy, idea, solution to a problem, etc." (Writing Public Lives, 414). Both of these argument types would work with my public argument because I plan to explain the problems and causes of problems that Rolling Stone had with their original UVA rape article as well as evaluate the solutions that SPJ's Code of Ethics for professional journalism provides.
Reflection:
After reading and replying to Jenny and Rachel's blog posts on "My Rhetorical Action Plan" and "Considering Types", I have found that we all have a pretty good idea of which argument type best suits what we are trying to achieve in our own arguments. Also, after discussing the different types of arguments in class, I realized that the evaluative argument wouldn't work for my project. A more effective alternative to the causal argument would be the refutation argument. This is because I want to point out the mistakes that Rolling Stone made and explain why they were wrong and why what they thought was okay to publish actually wasn't. Below I have provided the links to Jenny and Rachel's blog posts that I was referring to in my reflection.
Jenny:
"My Rhetorical Action Plan"
"Considering Types"
Rachel:
"My Rhetorical Action Plan"
"Considering Types"
I think it is great that you have two different types of arguments that you could explore with. I personally think that with your argument and genre, the casual argument would be the most successful. It would fit in with the feel of the blog post, as well as introducing but not forcing a means to finding a solution to the problem. However, either one of them would be able to work with your controversy.
ReplyDeleteThe casual argument works perfectly with your topic! I can definitely see how the evaluative argument could also work, and maybe even a combination of the two could create a great argument. My argument type is so different and it is cool to see how different subjects cater towards different argument types.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Rachel, it seems like the causal argument would fit your controversy much better than the evaluative. This way, you can look at specific causes that led to the scandal, and comment on how each created a problem. They seem like they would achieve similar ends in your project, though, so I'd say go with the one that makes you feel like it would help you understand your controversy the most.
ReplyDelete