We like to argue, but are we arguing the right way? Often, arguing turns into \"

Question

We like to argue, but are we arguing the right way? Often, arguing turns into "I'm right, you're wrong" or "you don't know what you're talking about. Effective arguing is actually more difficult than we think. Here's why. Arguing involves engaging the talking points of the other side (opponent) and finding flaws in them. Consider an argument about whether minimum wage is good or bad. Richard is against minimum wage; Bill favors this policy. How should both debate? The wrong way of arguing is for Bill to just spotlight the merits of the policy-reduces 50/10 wage inequality, enhances productivity, etc. The right way is to engage the other's talking points-minimum wage does not necessarily lead to inflation, kill jobs, etc. On the other hand Richard should find flaws in the supporting points used by proponents of minimum wage-it's the wrong policy to reduce inequality, tax credits do a better job of achieving this, the productivity gain is lower than predicted, etc. And, remember, you cannot make a credible point without using supporting and credibie evidence. Arguing means you have to find weaknesses in your opponents position; once you have done that, then your talking points appear more credible, but you still need to back them with evidence. Notice, that effective arguing involves understanding the other sides talking points and being able to find flaws in them using the evidence that you know. That's what I mean by engaging the other side; it's not solely about showcasing your position Finally, it's the audience (those who hear the argument) who determine which side appears more credible; it's not the individual debaters. Read opinion pieces in the Wall Street Journal, The Economist, Financial Times. Boston Globe, New York Times, and other reputable printed media sources-a credible informed argumentative piece is always structured this way and it's designed to persuade readers who will then voice which side is more credible This week's discussion board activity will ask you to debate whether the United States should remain or leave the Paris Accord. I don't care about the position you take; instead your post will be graded based on your ability to structure your argument as described above. Specifically (1) your understanding of the other side's position; (2) ability to find flaws in the other side 's talking points using specific evidence: (3) ability to showcase your side's position with specific evidence. You can address these points in any order you want as long as it's coherent. Remember, other classmates will get a chance to read your post By evidence I mean credible information (data, expert statements, report findings); you can find that by doing a Google search. You will have to reference all pieces of evidence using the following format: According to Dr. Smith of Greenfield Institute, the planet's temperature has not fluctuated... or A report by Greenfield institute states that the planet's temperature has increased by 10% what I want to know is the source of lead to an automatic 0 on the assignment. You will have a maximum of 350 words to write your post. your evidence. Failure to do this will The post will close Monday (11/20) at 12 noon. A few bonus points will be provided if you reply once to someone else's post. However, to get bonus points you will have to contribute something informative in the exchange- such as citing a report that is not sourced in the post you are responding to whicth supports or disputes the writer's view. Your writing tone must be respectable and courteous. The post will be activated this afternoon Course Link/Discussion Board/Global Warming

Explanation / Answer

US must be a part of Parris Accord

1. US is super power. Many countries of world looks at US for help and for guidance. Thus US can take a lead and play as a role of leader.

2. US has been a major contributor to emmisiom of gases during last century as it developed. Thus US must take take responsibilty .

3. US has highly devloped and technically most advanced nation of world. US can thus pass on these technology to their developing counterparts to take menance.

4. No one can run away from the problem of climate change. Instead countries must come together and shoulder responsibility to curb menance otherwise catastrophe on humanity is not too far.

5. US has good finances and thus can contribute to the global pool of finances to take menance. Even US has pledged to contribute some $10 billion to the fund.

6. If US will run away from its responsibility then countries will doubt its credibility as work leader.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse W
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.