The article I chose to write about is about Vermont’s consideration of lowering the legal drinking age limit. It is argued in the article that the current laws are not working and maybe by lowering the legal drinking age then it will prevent underage drinkers from binge drinking and driving while intoxicated. Mothers Against Drunk Driving and other organizations and lawmakers state that lowering the age limit will not help but only make matters worse.
Within the third paragraph, the author uses over generalization. The Mothers Against Drunk Driving state “the higher age limit has saved thousands of lives since the 1984 enactment of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act.” This statement is very broad and not backed up with sources to provide the reader with a greater understanding of where the statistic came from and if it is reliable.
I also chose to write on the article “Arizona Weighs Bill to Allow Guns on Campuses.” The article writes about lawmakers wanting to allow people to be able to carry concealed weapons at public colleges and Universities.
The author uses cause and effect in the article. Ms. Johnson, a Republican from Mesa, said, “she believes that the recent carnage at Northern Illinois University could have been prevented or limited if an armed student or professor had intercepted the gunman. The police, she said, respond too slowly to such incidents and, besides, who better than the people staring down the barrel to take action?” This statement states that because students and teachers are not allowed to carry guns, the incident at NIU could have been prevented which is not a backed up statement.
Another fallacy used in the article is by using the either/or approach. It is evident with in the paper that the reader much choose whether or not they believe guns should be allowed to be carried on campus or not. It does not give the reader other choices that may be able to compromise both.
5 comments:
Really excellent Allison. You explain the fallacies and contextualize them clearly. It's especially important for you to be sensitive to cause/effect fallacies, as these are ones that pop up a lot in day-to-day argumentation. Great job.
I liked your blog it was easy to follow and it made sense without being able to see the article myself. You picked two very interesting articles to talk about and the topics drew me in. You did a good job explaining them.
Well done. I would like to comment though. This article is part of a series, and they should include information regarding the issue. Without that previous information the article is weak. Again, nice job in pointing out the weaknesses in the article
Nicely written. You used two of the biggest issues that are on the table. Both articles show who the sides in both articles just state their thoughts and do not back them up. You also made the post very easy to read and follow so the reader does not get lost.
Allison, great job on your blog post! It was easy to read and understand. I like how you summarized each article and then supported each example with facts on why they were the fallacy they were. I like the articles you picked. I also chose an article on underage drinking and the law. I think this is an issue that can be argued clearly.
Post a Comment