Section A:
1.Reflect on the importance of definitions. Why does the book suggest that trying to decide on the best way to define a key idea or central concept is often difficult as well as controversial?
Section B: -True or False- (explain why true? why false?)
2.The Straw Man Fallacy reframes your opponent's thesis to make it easier to attack and perhaps refute it.
3.Ad Hominem Fallacy-" Implies that the first step necessarily leads to the second, and so on down the slope to disaster, when in fact, there is no necessary slide from the first step to the second."
4. Oversimplification-Generalizations that exaggerate and therefore oversimplify the truth.
5. Equivocation-Argument that resorts to threats, coercion, and/or force to bring about the acceptance of a conclusion that is often fallacious.
6. Red Herring "occurs when one tries to distract one's audience by invoking a consideration that is irrelevant to the topic under discussion."
7. Analogies-"Invented instances that have the great advantage of being protected from objections..."
8. Ostensive definition-to define by through example
9. Deductive reasoning-going from a series of specific cases to a general statement
10. False dichotomy-- Argument that resorts to threats, coercion, and/or force to bring about the acceptance of a conclusion that is often fallacious
11. Assumptions-an unexamined belief
12. Topic sentence-sentence that indicates what will be explored throughout the essay
13. Logos-appeal to logic
14. Ethos-appeal to emotion
15. Pathos-appeal to ethics
Section C
The Author's methods (in the attachment)--please apply 6 of the 6 Author's Methods to Tina Fey's article, "Confessions of a Juggler."
Please use textual evidence from the article to support your. Show your reasoning as well.
Example: Fey quotes authorities, "textual evidence." Explain why the textual evidence is proof of her quoting an authority-explain why the person is an authority etc.
(From The Author's Methods in the attachment)
A--Does the writer quote authorities? Are these authorities competent in this field?
B--Does the writer use statistics? If so, who compiled them, and are they appropriate to the point being argued?
C--Does the writer build the argument by using examples or analogies? are they satisfactory?
D--Does the writer consider all relevant factors? has he or she omitted some points that think should be discussed?
E--Does the writer seek to persuade by means of ridicule? if so, is the ridicule fair: Is it supported by rational argument?
F--Is the argument aimed at a particular audience?