At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
@e.mccormick @pooja195 @Luigi0210
@whpalmer4 @nincompoop @uybuyvf @UsukiDoll
What is an "argumentation chart"?
you dont know or are you testing me ?
Never used one in any of the argumentitive papers I wrote for college english 1 and 2 or philosophy... so not something every teacher uses.
well im in 8th grade so it should be easy lol
Probably some sort of chart or diagram relatin to the argument or your main points.... I did that with outlines, so it may be something along those lines.
yeah let me send you the file so you can understand it much more
http://faculty.virginia.edu/schoolhouse/WP/ArgumentHandouts.html This has an Argument Chart one..... it is probably that sort of hing, and yah, it looks like a different way to organize an outline.
for each reason i have to tell them where i got it from... they want evidence
i need to research but i need help
Yah, so basically finding out the basics of your argument and charing them on one side, but also what other people would say against it and how you deal with that. Yes, references are always important. Also, try not to do a straw man. That is a counter claim you can push over. The counter claim needs to be strong but you have a way to deal with it such as, "That is why I am choosing this specific case," or something that says, "And for people that hold this position strongly, there is no good answer."
okay so i started my claim and filled out the issue question. can you help me through it all
Well, here is a really great reference for you: http://animal-testing.procon.org/
okay so ill do animal testing instead
what do i put for reason 1
Well, they have a lot on that site. It makes it easy to find sources and argument ideas. The cover both sides so you can get a good idea of claims and counter claims.
Whenever you do an argument it sould be something you have at least a bit of an interest in.... even if you don't know much about it, if you have some interest, then picking a side is easier because you are willing to look into it.
should reason 1 be like "Animal testing has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments"
Yes, so you are using the overall history of it to prove that it has worked in the past so why not continue with it.
so what about couterclaim
The counter argument to that could be something along the lines of, "People used to do medical testing on blacks in the past (see Tuskegee syphilis experiments), so is the past really a good reason?" Then you need to find a way to balance that idea that the past for animal testing is more acceptable than it is for doing testing on blacks.
Here is a good reference on Tuskegee... basically they just let a bunch of blacks die of syphilis to see how it changed their health vs. ones that did not have syphilis. http://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm
can i just argue about the cons of animal testing ?
In any sort of argument, that is the sort of thing a claim and counter claim is. You say A is good. A is good because of item 1, 2, and 3. Now, some people do not like items 1, 2, or 3. In their opinion, this makes A bad. So you want to put a realistic face to BOTH sides, but strongly put forward the idea that A is good because 1, 2 and 3 are strong or more needed than the people that want to do away with A, 1, 2, and 3. Obviously you can also argue something is bad. However, arguing something is bad is the same as arguing that getting rid of it is good. So you can think of ALL argument from the standpoing that A is good and just change A to Getting rid of B if you need to say something is bad.
Yes, you can. But you need counter claims. If your claim is that the history of animal testing is sucessful, then your counter claim can be the history of other testing is unsuscessful and therefore history is not a good measure.... OR you can find counter claims that the history is unsuccessful... so at times it fails. For each claim, the counter claim will be something that attacks it.
okay i gettt it'
can you find me another website that is just like that bc i need to use 2 websites
need to have atleast 2 work cited pages
I actually remember one animal testing failure.... I just need to find a reference to it.
OH! Counter claim, and how to blow it away: http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/05/saccharin-discovered-accident/ So saccharin was found to cause cancer in rats, but this was later disproved, so the history of animal testing is flawed because the rat study is flawed. Good counter claim. However... why was the rat study disproved? They did primate studies (monkies, chimps, etc.) and found hat what happens in rats does NOT happen in primates, so would not happen to humans. So animal testing lead to more animal testing that lead to a final result.
i agree on the animals so im trying to argue it
i agree on testing animals
Oh, and I did bring up the Tuskegee thing for another reason. Animal testing, no matter how cruel it is, can certainly be said to be better than what they did to those guys! So you can point out how animal testing helps prevent human testing.
That is the type of thing that supporting an argument is made of. You show options, like no animal testing and how it would lead to either more medical problems OR to human testing, both of which are terrible alternatives. Therefore, we need animal testing. You then take sources like the Tuskegee study as support to show that this is not some made up concern. Human testing has happened and had serious health conciquences for several families. This strnthens your argument through both logos and pathos, logic and emotion. The logical part is a referenc to the experts on the past of human testing. The emotional argument is the devistation that was done to humans rather than doing some animal testing.
thanks for helping me!
I hope that gives you enough to work with between procon.org and those two studies. Procon will have lots of ideas and the Tuskeegee and saccarin studies will give you a couple citable sources to work with. How you word it, well, needs to be up to you. But at least it is a few things to work from.