For this blog I will be explaining which type of argument I am considering for my public argument project. I will also discuss why and the reason I did not choose the other possibilities.
 |
Ohl, Bill. "option". 1/16/2006 via Flickr
Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic |
I am considering using a proposal argument. I have leaning towards this method due to the nature of my audience. This argument analyzes a particular problem and then develops a proposal for addressing the problem in its thesis. They map out their solutions step-by-step for their readers. I truly belief that this is the best method for many reasons. Everybody in this industry has chosen to be here. They have a vested interest and a lot at stake depending on how the industry flows. There is also a mutual feeling of everybody being against them, which unites the members. Using this information, I believe that by presenting the "real" issue and the best possible solution for all participating parties is the correct approach. Getting the "buy in" may be the easy part though. Making any kind of change will most assuredly be much more difficult.
I would also consider evaluative as a possibility but this would mean that a policy must all ready be in effect. Likewise, a casual argument could also be a choice. Stating the problem and pointing to different solutions is similar to what I am intending but the proposal has a plan of action included with its step-by-step process.
A position argument has been going on for 40 years and accomplished nothing. Just adding to what is all ready out there isn't of interest to me.
A refutation argument would be the least effective as that would immediately put me at odds with the audience. Though by the end they may see how that is not the case, I believe I would loose a large majority right off the bat.
No comments:
Post a Comment