Article Critique

Question 1

“Kinds” of Essays:

Answer 1

1. Personal: focus on self (a life experience)
2. Expository: focus on a subject (description/explanation and/or to “inform”)
3. Argumentative: focus on reader (writing on a topic/idea with critical thesis)
4. Analysis: focus on an “idea” with sustained evaluation of that idea to critical form

Question 2

provides a descriptive statement without a specific “argument” to be considered

Answer 2

Expository thesis

Question 3

: provides a specific argument (a position, a stand, an idea) that will be discussed or “argued” in the main body of the essay—

Answer 3

Argumentative thesis

Question 4

clearly stated/obvious and stated in Introduction of an essay or article. Impt. Side note: “Explicit” theses will be the required form on any Formal Essays. BUT it will require further “critical quality” and based on the human condition (notes to follow). So even though a thesis might be “explicit” (obvious and clearly stated), it might not necessarily offer critical quality, reading without a specific claim. You will be required to offer a claim in your own argument for thesis development.

Answer 4

explicit argumentative thesis

Question 5

: sometimes harder to distinguish – more involvement of the reader because they are required to determine author’s position, idea, message. Its not explicitly (clearly) stated.

Answer 5

implicit argumentative thesis

Question 6

has come to mean “devoid of substance”, “puffing” or exaggeration, or even as “already answered” questions. Academically, however, it represents “skill in the effective use of speech or writing.” In Aristotelian terms, it means the art of expressing “truth” about an idea, message or argument, clearly and logically.

Answer 6

Rhetoric

Question 7

Three main Models of Rhetoric:

Answer 7

Personal, Expository, Persuasive (PEP)
1. Personal: places emphasis on the writer (situation and/or perspective of)
2. Expository: places emphasis on the subject/message (more descriptive)
3. Persuasive: places emphasis on the reader (to convince, appeal to, persuade)

Question 8

strict instruction (a harshness, or severe emphasis in some respects); meant to teach/lecture

Answer 8

Didactic voice

Question 9

an argument presented that is either contentious or controversial [sometimes the topic itself but usually seen as contentious through tone (attitude of the author), which can find form in a hostile or passive-aggressive approach towards a subject]. They are oftentimes characterized as attacks. Note: not all essays that have a controversial topic are polemics, however. The term is usually applied towards presentations that are “opinionated to a fault” and can be insulting or considered offensive (but not always), or without acknowledgement of alternative perspectives. Also note: “Balance” doesn’t always have to appear in Arguments, but polemics take positions that deliberately defy this and are usually controversial in doing so.

Answer 9

Polemic

Question 10

: A summary concisely re-states the central idea(s) of a reading
o They are accurate (no analyzation)
o They are without judgement (no personal opinion/reflection). Just the facts.
- Summaries can be useful to provide “context” for the reader; they show you are able to clearly determine what an essay/article/discussion is about before you proceed with your piece (whether challenging, further clarifying, complementing, broadening, assessing, etc). A summary can range from a whole paragraph(s) to just a sentence (or two) for context (depending on assignment or writing purpose or directive).

Answer 10

summary

Question 11

“How one speaks about and names the world.” The controversial voice in writing or in person.

Answer 11

Discourse: (Dialogue/discussion)

Question 12

A type of “false consciousness.” Personal philosophies/morals/attitudes, etc. (discourse becomes part of one’s ideology; its how you speak about or write about or share your ideology - Note: ideologues and discursive applications are influenced by many factors such as one’s education, media, family, place of beginning, peers, history, culture, etc…

Answer 12

Ideology: (Ideas/beliefs)

Question 13

does not mean “to always find fault,” but to reflect and discuss in a cogent and effective manner an informed understanding or evaluation of a topic or piece of writing (such as an article). It can include fault or weakness but can also highlight/underscore strengths and value(s). It’s about “awareness” as key to successful reading (or writing).

Answer 13

Critical analysis

Question 14

are “errors” of logic and reasoning – “evidence” presented to support claims/ arguments/ ideas, but in fact are actually non-supportive because of logical misuse. The following are the more commonly seen fallacies in arguments: note: not all arguments have logical fallacies! The majority are well-crafted (reasonable) presentations.

Answer 14

logical fallacies

Question 15

(“To the person”). Character attacks. Deflects attention from real issues by attacking/criticizing the person rather than the argument itself. Cannot find means to attack the argument so they resort to “name-calling” or personal attacks of character. OR they deliberately misdirect their argument by focusing attention to the quality of one’s character, rather than focusing on the issue itself. OR are too ignorant/ immature to understand how to effectively challenge an argument or one’s perspective. Examples:
o “[He] is nothing more than a self-absorbed fear-monger with a bad combover.”
o “[She] doesn’t know what she’s talking about in her tacky skirts.”
o “[They] should focus more on their double chin than their politics.”

Answer 15

Ad Hominem

Question 16

(“To the people”): Manipulates emotional responses in the audience based on awareness of symbols or values or ideas of particular importance to that group. For example:
- “Western Canadians believe in real family values, so they don’t support the movement to legalize same-sex marriage”

Answer 16

Ad Populum

Question 17

(False opposites): Bogus claims. Either “this” happens or “X” will occur (which are unrelated).
- “If Mary doesn’t get a new car for graduation, she will never be able to function as a mature adult.”
- “If we don’t win these hockey playoffs, we will never accomplish anything worthwhile in our lives.”

Answer 17

Either/ Or

Question 18

(Group Think): Operates on inclusion, but also on exclusion. Desire often misrepresented as need. Plays on our urge to fit in, join the crowd (emotional appeal).
- “John has a new pair of Nikes, Mom, so I have to have a pair also.”
- “I need the newest smartphone because all my friends have it.”

Answer 18

Bandwagon appeal

Question 19

faulty reasoning that reduces complex issues and situations to simple description and unidimensional conclusions (which can be irresponsible).
- “Stick to your diet and the rest of life’s problems will also melt away.”

Answer 19

Oversimplification

Question 20

reducing the “one” as representative of “all.” It can be a “kind” of stereotyping, but stereotyping, specifically, is usually received (or can be applied) in a negative frame (though not always… depends on the context). But Overgeneralization is not necessarily meant to be negative as seen in below examples (but it can sometimes be perceived or read as such).
- “All Newfoundlanders talk fast.” Or “All British people are reserved.”

Answer 20

Overgeneralization

Question 21

Used to deflect or divert attention from an issue the writer/speaker does not want examined. Writer often sweeps aside a whole array of complex issues. For example:
- “Of course, Native people were promised certain lands and payments, but wouldn’t they want to stand on their own two feet?”

Answer 21

Red Herring

Question 22

Going nowhere/ in circles. Redundant arguments. All circular arguments wrongly presume that a premise/ assertion – which has yet to be proven – can be treated as self-evident fact.
- “Reality shows are terrible because they are awful.” (and therefore, awful because they are terrible)

Answer 22

Circular Argument

Question 23

an analogy is a way of comparing to provide context or clarification/ understanding. But a “false analogy” actually detracts because of either a disconnect, relevance, or inappropriateness. Analogy is non-supportive.
- “Students should be able to look at textbooks and notes during examinations. After all, have x-rays to guide them during an operation; carpenters reference blueprints during the building process, so students should be able to consult textbooks and notes as well.” – false analogy because surgeons and carpenters are not being examined or evaluated on their knowledge, whereas students are. Different contextual space and purpose.

Answer 23

False Analogy

Question 24

“Does not Follow”: A Non-Sequitur carries a disassociated premise. They are irrelevant claims.
- “I should receive a higher grade because I received an A in all my other courses.” (Or “because I worked extremely hard.”) – can’t quantify (or qualify) what “working extremely hard” is… its an individual contextual space/experience. And it is irrelevant what one’s grades are in other courses/ subjects as to the grade received in another. But this kind of logic goes beyond academe and can apply to “life reasoning” in general.

Answer 24

Non-Sequitur

Question 25

The _______ fallacy “distorts” an argument to the challenger’s benefit to make it easier for them to attack. Puts words in the other’s mouth that they did not say (nor argue) - The argument: “People should be able to apply for an extension on their Unemployment Benefits if they are unable to secure a job in their given timeframe.” The response: “So, you think people should be able to live for free? Or “So you think people don’t need to try and find work?” these are both Straw man fallacies because the original argument was not suggesting either of these items.

Answer 25

Straw Man

Question 26

exaggerations (Hyperbole): A certain event will lead to another event (often extreme). Cause and effect connection is completely unfounded. - “If I don’t get this iPad, my life will be ruined.” - “If abortion is legalized [or made illegal], then the entire country has lost its morals and decency.” o The slippery slope can also be applied or suggested when the subject or inquiry is somewhat “grey” or undetermined, usually with something controversial. For example: a few years ago, it was questioned whether some actors weren’t nominated for an Oscar because of sexual misconduct claims in Hollywood. Can’t say for certain though, therefore it’s a slippery slope to suggest such.

Answer 26

Slippery Slope

Question 27

1. Arguments presented to INQUIRE: not looking for conviction or to “win” necessarily but simply opening up a conversation about something or some issue or subject (perhaps to engender/inspire debate or to allow one to “rethink” a topic/issue). 2. Arguments presented to CONVINCE: these arguments want to “win” (win their “case”). Presenting reason and evidence in support of the claim. Wants reader or audience to agree with them/be on their side by the end. 3. Arguments presented to PERSUADE: like convincing, these arguments also want to “win” and come to agreement, but they also want MORE. Looking to change not only thinking, but behaviour… they want you to “do” something, act upon something, change something.

Answer 27

The 3 Aims of Arguments

Question 28

: writing strategies used to get reader (or audience) to “agree” with a point of view or position (written or in speech). Their use doesn’t necessarily mean they will be successful… that’s up to “the other” (the reader) to decide. Three kinds: 1. Pathos (Pity): invokes (or evokes) empathy or sympathy from the reader/audience. Appeals to sense of emotion towards a subject, idea, concern, issue, or even a “self.” 2. Logos (Logic): Argument is sound and reasonable. Sometimes can be “fact-driven.” But should also read as accurate in logical direction, tone, and conclusion. Argument can still be debatable, but what has been presented forms a reasonable position… 3. Ethos (Environment, Ethics, or Experience): usually culturally or environmentally driven. Writer has demonstrated their ability to speak on / address a topic or issue or subject by either their experience or cultural discourse or knowledge

Answer 28

The 3 Rhetorical Appeals

Question 29

The “classic” argument. Three parts: The claim, the grounds, and the warrant. Most often used to establish a “need” or necessity, for example: “the importance of literacy in society.” For this course, it works well if you are responding to something (like a “quote”) that has 3 distinct parts, where you would simply assess each of those 3 parts. Using Toulmin’s Model can generally apply for most arguments, where you simply have your thesis (your claim), then your 3 discussion points (your grounds), followed by a reflection of thesis to support (the warrant). But note: there is no concession in Toulmin’s; if you want to concede something, then the Model below (#2) is more effective and appropriate. But to recap: The claim (Introduction): a critical assertion. This depends on your topic response, as well as the kind of thesis you will be asked to make. The grounds (Main body ideas): the “evidence” or discussion points you use to support your claim. In a 5-paragraph essay, you will have 3 grounds (3 main body paragraphs). The warrant (Conclusion): this should see a “reflective quality” in light of your critical thesis claim. The warrant is your ultimate purpose. It answers the “so what?” question, so to speak. The warrant links the claim to the grounds to establish “reasoning”.

Answer 29

Toulmin's Model

Question 30

: an argument that allows the writer to “acknowledge” the other side’s point of view. It’s a technique that provides some balance, fairness, and can establish credibility. This concession is very briefly noted in the introduction so that it illustrates the writer’s awareness and respect for another viewpoint from the outset. But follows with “ideological build” to start “introducing” your refute of the stated claim, and ending with your thesis to alternative effect. The Main Body holds 1 paragraph for “full concession” and 2 paragraphs for “refutes.” In what order is up to you. But your Conclusion maintains pure refutation. But your argument/ discussion should ultimately conclude with a final point to firmly establish your refutation (end your response on this, your last sentence). This model works well when you can “See” and understand the point of view presented, but you also have other ideas/perspective, or flat-out fundamentally disagree

Answer 30

Concession - Refutation

Question 31

“conciliation” means “to make calm” of “pacify” or “assuage.” In this sense, the argument/discussion reads like a compromise has been met. This kind of argument is less concerned with winning/losing, but is more related to having a conversation or dialogue about something. It explores common grounds, attempts to unite opposing sides. It’s a “negotiating tool” and acts as a mediator in some respects. Argument is very respectful to both sides, and presentation should be neutral (cannot establish what side the author/writer/you are on, or, when you don’t want to choose sides). Usually appropriate with something controversial (but not necessarily), or, with something that has a clear division in society. Note: the thesis applied for this Model must be neutral as well. A question for a thesis usually works well for Rogerians, since they are considered neutral in appropriate form.

Answer 31

Rogerian Conciliation

Question 32

as the term suggests, this kind of argument is highly motivational, reasoning inspired. The argument is driven by this positivity, and although usually associated with oral communication or speeches, this kind of written argument works well on topics that need some clear inspiration – even hope—whether towards “an other,” a society, or even a “self.” It works well when something (such as a “quote” or an article) is uninspiring or profoundly negative, or defeatist. Your response wouldn’t allow for any concessions – all positive, decent, inspirational, encouraging, helpful. **it follows very much the same as Toulmin’s Model, in that you have your 3 main body paragraph ideas—the difference here is that they are all inspired or positive or hopeful or encouraging. No “concession” to the negativity or defeatism or hopelessness. Note: Monroe’s motivational can be applied to a quote/idea that is already inspirational… you would simply continue with the positivity/ ideology in your response. But they are best applied, again, to something that “needs” some inspiration or encouragement

Answer 32

Monroe's Motivational

Question 33

if reader/audience feels like the author doesn’t know the material or isn’t “qualified” to write on a subject, the purpose is lost. Also, and depending on the “topic,” MRs also know their arguments’ contexts (an understanding of the issue/argument at hand… the past, the present, future, so to speak. They have awareness of what they are writing about).

Answer 33

Mature reasoners are well informed

Question 34

we have opinions that we are heavily invested into the point where our whole sense of reality (right/wrong; good/bad; our very sense of ourselves) is tied up in them. However, the difference between an extremist (or even an argument “opinionated to a fault,” such as seen in polemics), and a mature reasoner, is that the “MR” is able to consider or appreciate an “other” point of view, is able to step back and critique own argument, and has the ability to re-examine. This does not have to come out in the argument itself necessarily but is usually evident (subtly so) by the style and tone/approach of the piece.

Answer 34

Mature reasoners are Self-Critical and Open to Constructive Criticism from Others:

Question 35

to be effective, arguments by MRs must be “other-directed,” attuned to the people/audience they want to reach. They shouldn’t be self-serving (awareness is the goal, remembering). Adapting to the audience can sometimes be the biggest challenge.

Answer 35

Mature Reasoners Argue with their Audience in Mind

Question 36

can be one of the most effective ways to get a point across or discuss a topic or simply open up a conversation. It can be the defining strategy a writer uses (driven by comedic or humorous ideology), or the occasional use “here and there.” If played well with tack and skill, through a different lens (or rethink it). Humour can range from the subtle to the obvious (even sarcastic), to the clever/witty, to illustrating a sense of humility, to carefully crafted satirical pieces. Humour in writing (especially arguments) can: - Relax people and open them up to a new perspective - It can create interest - There is “truth” often found in humour.

Answer 36

humour

Question 37

is “the exploration of truth through absurdity.” Think of some comedy “news shows” like This Hour has 22 Minutes or even some late-night comedy “opening monologues.” But is a very specific category.. you’ll know it when you see it or read it

Answer 37

satire

Question 38

falls within satire, only that a parody must have an “original host,” so for example, a comedic sketch that is a parody of “Romeo & Julliet.” - But the point is, sometimes through humour, “truths” are revealed. (Not always though… sometimes humour is just used for one of the first 2 points noted above

Answer 38

parody