1 / 4

27 June

27 June. Graded papers and grade reports Keep the MLA Argument Paper to refer to the annotation to help you revise and edit your paper on your own. How to evaluate arguments Claim/Evidence/Assumption/Inference Advertisements Logical Fallacy exercises p. 492

kaspar
Download Presentation

27 June

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 27 June • Graded papers and grade reports • Keep the MLA Argument Paper to refer to the annotation to help you revise and edit your paper on your own. • How to evaluate arguments • Claim/Evidence/Assumption/Inference • Advertisements • Logical Fallacy exercises p. 492 • Introductions and opposing viewpoints p. 493 • Argumentation-persuasion rough draft check and peer review • HW: Read “Entitlement” on p. 521 and provide an in-depth response to #4 on p. 524 to turn in. Bring clean argumentation-persuasion draft tomorrow.

  2. Chart Definitions Claim – central assertion or proposition of author Evidence – material offered to support a claim Assumptions – belief, principle that writer takes for granted (explains why the evidence justifies the claim) Inference – conclusion or judgment from premise

  3. Bose Advertisement

  4. Logical Fallacies • Choose one of the ads and complete a chart. On the back of the chart, identify if the evidence is based on logos, ethos, and pathos. Decide of there is a logical fallacy involved. • FALLACY - something that is believed to be true but is erroneous • Post hoc – erroneous cause/effect relationships • Non sequitur – drawing a conclusion with no logical connection to the evidence cited • Ad hominem – attacking a person instead of the issue/pt of view • Appeals to questionable or faulty authority – weakens ETHOS • Begging the question – failure to establish proof for controversy • False analogy – disregards significant dissimilarities & implies that since two things have one thing in common they are alike in all respects • Either/or – only two outcomes possible • Red herring – intentional digression from the issue

More Related