Everythings an Argument ch 5, 13, 17, 18/19

ad hominem (ethical)

"to the man"/"against the man" attacks directed at the character of a person rather than at the claims he or she makes

non sequitor (logical)

(not in a sentence) an argument which claims, reasons, or warrants fail to connect logically; 1 point does not follow another "you dont love me or youd buy me that bike"

dogmatism (ethical)

a writer who assumes that a particular position is the only one that is conceivably acceptable within a community

schemes

add a stylistic 'zing' to an argument

slippery slope (emotional)

an argument that portrays today's tiny misstep as tomorrow's slide into disaster

fallacies

arguments that are flawed by their very nature or structure

the straw man (logical)

attacks an argument that isnt really there. speaker sets up a straw man in order to create an argument that is easy to knock down and then claim in victory

building a critical mass

find more than 2 pieces of info, circumstantial evidence is indirect, expand research if only 2 major sources, possibility ur initial stance may have been wrong

hasty generalization (logical)

inference drawn from insufficient evidence. also forms the basis for most stereotypes about people or institutions

tropes

involve a change in ordinary meaning of the word or phrase (metaphor, simile, analogy)

equivocation (logical)

juvenile tricks of language "i couldn't have plagiarized, i wrote the entire paper myself"

false authority (ethical)

occurs when writers offer themselves or other authorities as sufficient cause for believing a claim (buy this shampoo bc Marilyn monroe uses it)

either-or choices (emotional)

over simplified arguments by reducing the options for action to only two choices

inverted word order (scheme)

parts of sentence or clause are not in the usual subject-verb word order

faulty casualty (logical)

post hoc, ergo propter hoc -- "after this, therefore because of this" the fallacious assumption that because one event or action follows another, the first causes the second

assessing print sources

relevance, credentials of the author, stance of author, credentials of publisher or sponsor, stance of the publisher or sponsor, currency, accuracy, level of specialization, audience, length, availability, omissions

assessing field research

support the claim, recheck all data and conclusions, identify time and place, how u played in research

begging the question (logical)

the claim is made on the grounds that cannot be acceptable as true because those grounds are in doubt "you cant fail me in this course, im an A student"

quantitative data

the sort that can be observed and counted

bandwagon (emotional)

urge people to follow the same path everyone else is taking

antithesis (scheme)

use of parallel structures to mark contrast or opposition

sentimental (emotional)

use tender emotions excessively to distract readers from facts

reversed structures (scheme)

used for special effect

antonomasia (trope)

using somebody's nickname to support your argument

faulty analogy (logical)

we look at comparisons to give ideas greater presence and clarity one concept by measuring it against another that is more familiar. one inaccurate or inconsequential comparisons between objects or concepts

assessing electronics sources

who posted info? URL offer credibility? info can be verified in another source? how current is info? perspectives represented? straight-forward, biased, or parody?