Forensic, Deliberative, and Ceremonial Arguments: Comparison and Examples

An argument is a claim supported by reasons and pieces of evidence. Arguments have five primary attributes. Firstly, argumentation is a social process which involves two or more parties responding to one another’s proposal or claim. For the case of a written argument, the writer responds to the content of the essay through a critique process. The responses should not only involve restating the same claims and reasons but rather providing supportive pieces of evidence to the positions taken accordingly. Secondly, the aim of an argument is to make the audience adhere to the written critique. The objective is to influence the audience with the aim of gaining support to

Different people have different types of arguments, depending on the situation, which may be good or not good. An argument can be defined as many things. According to Mike, who I interviewed, he interprets an argument as something being determined or evaluated that is true or false with the presence of credible research or evidence. The definition of an argument according to me, is defined as the exchange of ideas to another person that may be true, false, negative, or

I chose to review the article Goodridge v. Department of Public Health by Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall. In this article, Marshall examines the issue of same-sex marriage by reviewing both sides of the argument, and she comes to the conclusion that not allowing this union is unconstitutional. In a good argument, both propositions must be taken into account and premises from each side should be studied prior to making a final conclusion. Most of the premises used in her argument were prescriptive, or based on personal values (Boss, 2014, p. 199). Chief Justice Marshall mentioned that she had given full deference to the other side of the argument, but found, based on her strong premises, that not allowing same-sex marriage is against a person’s civil rights.

Argumentation is a significant element, and people tend to use it every day. By using the word “argumentation” I do not mean to go against someone’s opinion and arguing with them, but what I mean is making others have faith or some sort of belief on the person who is arguing. However, these arguments can occur in two ways such as direct argument and indirect argument. Furthermore, these arguments work with elements and there are three types of elements ethos, pathos, and logos. These elements are engaged with practical reasoning which are divided into three parts datum, warrant, and claim. Accordingly, to discuss about the process of the argumentation “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” will be a notable example.

While the decision, composed by Justice Anthony Kennedy, perceives a centuries-old "comprehension" of marriage as "a union between two persons of the inverse sex," it says "the historical backdrop of marriage is one of both progression and change."

The Thirteen American Arguments is a book designed to explain and explore the idea of argument all throughout the world. How the government is ran, and how every past argument this country has had has been a similar one to the one presented beforehand. This process is a never ending argument and debate. The freedom of debate keeps us inspired and free; that this shows strength and not weakness. Not only has the 13 arguments been crafted into something different every generation, they have been shaping this country into the country it is meant to be.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Many conservative groups do NOT agree with this decision. The gay marriage debate has been simmering for as long as I can remember. The four articles I have selected give information from four different perspectives including that of liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and orthodox Jews. With so many differing opinions, one can understand why it's been so hard for the nation to come to agree on this issue.

“In 1984, a British geneticist named Alec Jeffreys stumbled upon one of our most important forensic tools: DNA fingerprinting. Since his “eureka moment,” the scientific technique has been used successfully to identify perpetrators of a crime, clarify paternity and exonerate people wrongly convicted” (Jones). DNA evidence, specifically simple-mixture, is the most accurate type of forensic evidence we currently have at our disposal, but even it is not infallible. Other types of forensic evidence are much less accurate, but unfortunately their use is still permitted in U.S courtrooms. Jurors may be misled by experts within the courtroom as well. These misconceptions about the accuracy of forensic science and the field in general lead to many problems in the courtroom.

Speeches have been used for a long time to communicate to multitudes since they are declared as one of the most effective forms of relating information. Ideally, the specificity of speech ensures the audience has a hint of the data conveyed and is likely to memorize critical parts. For example, “I have a dream” by Martin Luther King is a memorial speech that was delivered on august 28, 1963 and many people have a historic review of the text (Mattern and Allan 28). However, the outcome would not have been effective if it were delivered as a written argument. Additionally, listeners immediately reflect on the fundamental aspects of the dialogue and react. Innately, there was prompt feedback as more people registered their

An argument is an attempt to prove that something is true (or probably true) by offering evidence. In philosophy there are usually three premises that are part of the argument. Premises are evidence used to attempt to prove the conclusion. The third premise is the one that sums up that argument. Arguments can be objectively true or subjectively true. For an argument, x is objectively true if and only if x is the case, and x is subjectively true for S if and only if x coheres with S’s worldview of X is simply a matter of taste.

speaker, audience. In their writing (chapter 1) argue that everything can be turned into an argument. They support their claim by first telling about Michelle Obama's tweets about her concern of a kidnapping, by terrorist group Boko Haram, of more than 200 Nigerian girls in 2014. Then by explaining how we make arguments. The author’s purpose is to inform readers about make arguments by using ethos, pathos, and logos.

In the reading the author explains how arguments are very much a part of everyday life and are simply conversations which address subjects or topics that split opinions and that a person has a different view point on compared the other people they surround themselves with. Greene explains how arguments include and consider previous conversations and discussions concerning related topics or even the same subject. The author continues by describing how to start or enter a conversation you must first show an understanding of the topic being discussed, you must be able to shape information in ways that enable you to enter the conversation and therefore can anticipate the direction the conversation will go in.

Argument is an ability that requires a person to have deep and elaborate thinking. The ideas or opinions supported by concrete and powerful thinking skills. Through argument, one convinces woes or passes information across different platforms. It helps in problem solving of various natures and delivery of ideas and passing opinions. It is through argument platforms that we learn high order thinkers and people who reason differently. It is a means by which we are able to solve issues ranging from answering questions, making judgements and drawing conclusions. The learning process in technology certainly requires critical thinking to help in analysis of in-depth issues and problems (Scott, 2009).

In the essay “Finding the Good Argument Or Why Bother With Logic,” Jones provides information about well-thought and quality argument. express her disapproval about argument method that reign in the modern society. In order to foster a healthier environment for productive debate, we need to learn the ways in which one can successfully find out the argument by following the different rules that Jones provided in this article. As a college student, we need to know the true meaning of an argument and how we can improve it in everyday life.

Whereas, this ruling does nothing to insure the rights of gay people to marry, it goes a long way in aiding in the fact that denying the basic right to marry is basically unconstitutional in and of itself. Justice Andrews’ implies the decision to deny gay people the right to marry is the very basic fact on which I will base my argument: There is nothing “constitutional” about the denial of the right to marry. In fact, an examination of the both the pro and anti-gay marriage arguments will show that there are no reasonable grounds on which to deny people the right to marry (meaning that the anti-gay marriage contingent is rooting its logic in the personal biases of a large segment of public opinion).