INTRODUCTION The purpose of the argumentative essay is to objectively deliberate the pros and cons of any specified controversial issue. Expected to be disclosed are the positives and negatives of both sides with corroboration from professional sources. Those sources can emanate from Google or Google Scholar. If the two sides are not equally mediated, the left impression is persuasion. Remember, the primary task is to offer precocious explications for both sides without intimating that one side takes precedence over the other. The moment that one clearly sees a biased perspective, persuasion becomes the blatant purpose. If the essay lucidly represents persuasion and not argumentation, it will receive an “F. ” Below is a list of “Introduction” expectations. Please peruse them meticulously and cautiously: A. Create an equation or anecdote with the following concepts: argumentative essay, claim, counterclaim, logical fallacy, and the chosen controversial issue. The equation can reflect any basic mathematical operation (addition, subtraction, multiplication, and/or division). Once selected, disaggregate (analyze) each word and its relevance to the argumentative essay. The anecdote can personify allegorical realizations of the above listed concepts. This allots room to contextualize the concepts in polarizations. Assign good, evil, qualitative, quantitative, induction, deduction, etc. to them and, once again, assay each term through targeted conversation. The conversations should be rich with appropriate diction, syntax, and semantics. This means utilizing the eight speech components, phrases, clauses, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures. The allegorical terms should represent and disclose human attributes. B. TAKE A FEW SENTENCES TO CREATE A SHORT FUNCTIONAL PARAGRAPH. THIS PARAGRAPH WILL SERVE AS THE LIAISON BETWEEN THE EQUATION OR ANECDOTE AND HISTORICAL SECTION. C. History serves as the cornerstone for any viable argument. To that end, be sure to chronicle the trends of your chosen controversial issue. This insinuates commencing with the origins of the issue. Please provide answers to the following questions: Who or what organization conjured the controversial issue? Why were both sides contemplated and implemented? What were the psychological, social, religious, and theoretical perceptions of both sides? Why were these perspectives considered? What has sustained their longevity from the incipient stages to the present? To effectively answer these questions, I expect Google, Google Scholar, and GCSC Virtual Library to be used. Remember to search for important dates, facts, numbers, and percentages to corroborate each time period discussed. Paragraph discussions are obligatory. But, to enhance explanation validity, I implore you to include charts, graphs, diagrams, etc. These should be placed in the APPENDIX section. So, create a blank sheet with the word “APPENDIX” in the center of the page. Extra large font sizes are permissible. Then, attach the appendages as separate pages behind that template. The number of “APPENDIX” pages will be contingent upon how large and detailed the charts, graphs, and diagrams will be. Remember that you will be adding to the APPENDIX as the Body and conclusion sections are completed. Hence, I expect dates, groups, and movements to be mentioned and illustrated. I also expect APA (American Psychological Association) format to be consistently followed. Make sure the trends are coherent and cohesive. TAKE A FEW SENTENCES TO TRANSITION FROM THE HISTORICAL DISCUSSION TO THE THESIS. D. THESIS STATEMENT: EVEN THOUGH DRUGS CAN BE MEDICINAL AND RECREATIONAL, ARGUING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL, SOCIAL, RELIGIOUS, AND THEORETICAL DOGMAS FROM AN OBJECTIVE PERSPECTIVE WILL CATAPULT ONE TO EMBRACE A UBIQUITOUS AND NON-JUDGEMENTAL APPROACH TOWARD NARCOTIC STIMULANTS AND DEPRESSANTS. BODY The purpose of the argumentative “Body” segment is to provide space for analysis and synthesis of your controversial topic. To do this effectively and efficiently, the four micro-thesis concepts must be fully implemented and developed. This section is the longest and most explanatory of all sections connected to this argumentative essay. Please dedicate four to five pages per micro-thesis component. This will allot a sixteen to twenty page window. This also means that all analytical discussions must emanate from empirical research. Empirical research includes ongoing interpretations of the subject matter chosen. Whether coming from a newspaper (google) or peer review journal (google scholar), the content contained within these reputable sources is valid and credible. Choosing corroboration from WIkipedia.com, Dogpile.com, Vista.com, etc., is considered illegal and unprofessional. Anyone who uses these sites will receive an “F” on the entire essay. Lastly, utilize the FULL AXES METHOD as arguments ensue. Grade increase or decrease will be premised on how well this method is developed throughout the essay. For example, if the essay is worth 20,000pts., the introduction and conclusion sections will be two thousand points each totaling 4,000pts. The remaining 16,000 points will be disaggregated into four sections of four thousand points each. There are four micro-thesis ideas and each must be discussed using the AXES METHOD. This insinuates four parts per discussion (assertion, example, explanation, & synthesis). Each of these AXES parts is worth 1,000 points equaling four thousand points per section. Four sections multiplied by 4,000 points equal 16,000 points. So, 1,000 points will be deducted for each incomplete phase of the AXES METHOD. Completing these sections will not become a major imposition if proper research is conducted. The outline appears twice for each section because this provides a context for multiple topic sentences per section. The goal is to reproduce a meticulous pattern for all stated ideas. Please do not cut corners. I expect consistency and continuity per idea deliberated. A WORD TO THE WISE SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT! Below is the Roman Numeral Outline Layout for the Argumentative Essay “BODY:” A. ASSERTION FOR THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ARGUMENT. PLEASE UTILIZE THE OCCASION/POSITION STATEMENT FORMAT! (4-5pgs.) 1. Example from Google (APA Format) 2. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 3. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the PSYCHOLOGICAL section, Sigmund Freud’s Psycho-analytical Theory will be implemented. Focus on which portions of the argument reflect ID, EGO, and SUPEREGO. Then, assign the appropriate Freudian component to that portion and discuss pertinent parallels. 4. Example from Google Scholar (APA Format) 5. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 6. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the PSYCHOLOGICAL section, Sigmund Freud’s Psycho-analytical Theory will be implemented. Focus on which portions of the argument reflect ID, EGO, and SUPEREGO. Then, assign the appropriate Freudian component to that portion and discuss pertinent parallels. B. ASSERTION FOR THE SOCIAL ARGUMENT. PLEASE UTILIZE THE OCCASION/POSITION STATEMENT FORMAT! (4-5pgs.) 7. Example from Google (APA Format) 8. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 9. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the SOCIAL section, B.F. Skinner’s Psycho-social Theory will be implemented. Focus on which portions of the argument reflect OPERANT CONDITIONING. MY “A” PEOPLE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER EDWARD THORNDIKE’S THEORY OF CONNECTIONISM AND C. HULL’S DRIVE REDUCTION THEORY. Then, assign the appropriate component (OPERANT CONDITIONING, CONNECTIONISM THEORY, DRIVE REDUCTION THEORY) to the social portion and discuss pertinent parallels. 10. Example from Google Scholar (APA Format) 11. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 12. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the SOCIAL section, B.F. Skinner’s Psycho-social Theory will be implemented. Focus on which portions of the argument reflect OPERANT CONDITIONING. MY “A” PEOPLE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER EDWARD THORNDIKE’S THEORY OF CONNECTIONISM AND C. HULL’S DRIVE REDUCTION THEORY. Then, assign the appropriate component (OPERANT CONDITIONING, CONNECTIONISM THEORY, DRIVE REDUCTION THEORY) to the social portion and discuss pertinent parallels. C. ASSERTION FOR THE RELIGIOUS ARGUMENT. PLEASE UTILIZE THE OCCASION/POSITION STATEMENT FORMAT! (4-5pgs.) 13. Example from Google (APA Format) 14. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 15. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the RELIGIOUS section, PHILOSOPHIES will be implemented. Choose your philosophical external arguments from the Phrontistery site. This site was posted on the Google Streaming page. There are 234 philosophies listed and defined. Choose THREE philosophies for your religious argument and discuss pertinent parallels. PS: If you would like to preface your specific philosophical arguments with general ones, consider the following GENERAL philosophies: (eudaemonism, extropianism, epistemology). 16. Example from Google Scholar (APA Format) 17. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 18. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the RELIGIOUS section, PHILOSOPHIES will be implemented. Choose your philosophical external arguments from the Phrontistery site. This site was posted on the Google Streaming page. There are 234 philosophies listed and defined. Choose THREE philosophies for your religious argument and discuss pertinent parallels. PS: If you would like to preface your specific philosophical arguments with general ones, consider the following GENERAL philosophies: (eudaemonism, extropianism, epistemology). D. ASSERTION FOR THE THEORETICAL ARGUMENT. PLEASE UTILIZE THE OCCASION/POSITION STATEMENT FORMAT! (4-5pgs.) 19. Example from Google (APA Format) 20. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 21. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the THEORETICAL section, LOGICAL FALLACIES will be implemented for the GOOGLE article. Choose your logical fallacy arguments from the SLIDESHARE POWERPOINT provided on the Google Streaming page. Choose THREE logical fallacies for your theoretical argument and discuss pertinent parallels. 22. Example from Google Scholar (APA Format) 23. Explanation and connection of evidence to chosen issue. This includes the EISEGESIS APPROACH. Take the VERBATIM QUOTE and extract words, phrases, clauses, speech components, sentence patterns, sentence purposes, and sentence structures to further disclose viable connections between the general observations of the controversial issue. 24. Significance/synthesis of controversial issue to an EXTERNAL CONTEXT. I will provide FOUR different contexts. You will discuss ONE per synthesis section, and I will dictate which one will be deliberated. For the THEORETICAL section, RHETORICAL TERMS will be implemented for the GOOGLE SCHOLAR article. Choose your rhetorical term arguments from the ELENCHUS/GREEK TERMS guide provided on the Google Streaming page. Choose THREE rhetorical terms for your theoretical argument and discuss pertinent parallels.FOLLOW THE ARGUMENTATIVE “BODY” SECTION/RELIGIOUS COMPONENT. THE WRITING PROCESS IS SIMILAR TO THE SOCIOLOGICAL COMPONENT. JUST FOCUS THE
ARGUMENT ON THE RELIGIOUS/MORAL ASPECT OF YOUR CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE.FOLLOW THE ARGUMENTATIVE “BODY”
SECTION/PSYCHOLOGICAL COMPONENT. JUST FOCUS THE
ARGUMENT ON THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT OF YOUR CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE.FOLLOW THE ARGUMENTATIVE “BODY” SECTION/THEORETICAL COMPONENT IN THE ROMAN NUMERAL OUTLINE. JUST FOCUS THEARGUMENT ON THE THEORETICAL ASPECT OF YOUR CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE. THIS MEANS TARGETING THE ARGUMENT AROUND PRESUPPOSITIONS YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT THE ISSUE.
THESE ARE THE “WHAT IF” STATEMENTS AND QUESTIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, CONSIDERING THE ABORTION TOPIC, I COULD MAKE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT: THE TOPIC OF ABORTION EMULATES MUSIC IN THE CACOPHONY PHASES. OR, I COULD ASK THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: WHAT IF ABORTIONS DID NOT PHYSICALLY EXIST AND ONLY DID SO IN PEOPLE’S MINDS?
ENGLISH 11 STUDENTS,
THE THEORETICAL COMPONENT OF THE ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY IS SIMILAR TO THE LAST THREE “BODY” SECTIONS. AS YOU FOLLOW THE ARGUMENTATIVE
“BODY” OUTLINE, PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE SYNTHESIS/SIGNIFICANCE SEGMENT. FOR THE GOOGLE ARTICLE CHOSEN, I EXPECT YOU TO CHOOSE THREE LOGICAL FALLACIES. FOR THE GOOGLE SCHOLAR ARTICLE, I EXPECT YOU TO CHOOSE THREE RHETORICAL TERMS. THE LOGICAL FALLACIES AND RHETORICAL TERMS STUDY GUIDES ARE POSTED ON THE GOOGLE STREAMING PAGE. PLEASE CONSULT THEM BEFORE COMPLETING THE SYNTHESIS/SIGNIFICANCE SEGMENTS.
The purpose of the argumentative essay conclusion is to EVALUATE your objective discussions in the body. Remember to evaluate requires one to assess the positives and negatives of an issue or idea while providing multiple angles of perception. For example, if abortion has been assiduously discussed in the body of an argumentative essay, the writer has effectively elucidated all plausible and reasonable arguments pro- choice and pro-life. So, the conclusion affords the opportunity for the writer to assess the validity and credibility of the arguments. This mandates one to review and contemplate the following questions: 1) Were the pro and con arguments convincing enough to help classify abortion as valid and credible? If so, why? If not, why not? 2) Are there any additional arguments found within the syntax of each pro and con statement? 3) Are these additional arguments kosher? If so, why? If not, why not? 4) If the pro and con arguments switched contexts and identities, how would this newfangled view change the way society perceives traditional pro and con arguments? 5) Is this new verisimilitudinous reality a healthy option for a multifaceted society? If so, why? If not, why not? There are many other questions that can be concocted. I just raised a few to provide proper context for efficacious evaluations. SECTION ONE (TWO PARAGRAPHS) Restate your thesis and add an exploratory question to serve as a segway into religious/moral evaluation. Considering the aforementioned questions, commence to evaluate the pro and con moral arguments of the controversial issue. The questions provided serve as a guide. The autonomy to explore different questions is always available. SECTION TWO (TWO PARAGRAPHS) Restate your thesis and add an exploratory question to serve as a segway into psychological evaluation. Considering the aforementioned questions, commence to evaluate the pro and con psychological arguments of the controversial issue. The questions provided serve as a guide. The autonomy to explore different questions is always available. SECTION THREE (TWO PARAGRAPHS) Restate your thesis and add an exploratory question to serve as a segway into sociological evaluation. Considering the aforementioned questions, commence to evaluate the pro and con sociological arguments of the controversial issue. The questions provided serve as a guide. The autonomy to explore different questions is always available. SECTION FOUR (TWO PARAGRAPHS) Restate your thesis and add an exploratory question to serve as a segway into theoretical evaluation. Considering the aforementioned questions, commence to evaluate the pro and con theoretical arguments of the controversial issue. The questions provided serve as a guide. The autonomy to explore different questions is always available. SECTION FIVE (TWO PARAGRAPHS) Choose an author from each “BODY” section and effectively argue the author’s purpose. Determine if the author’s purpose was to inform, persuade, entertain, etc. using corroboration from the evidence in each section to confirm conjectures. Extracting essential words, phrases, or clauses will satisfy this mandate. Tandem with each essay “BODY” component (religious, psychological, social, theoreticaL), conduct an author’s argument evaluation. The argument evaluation should consider the following topics: I. AUTHOR’S ARGUMENT EVALUATION A. Identify the issue B. Determine the author’s point-of-view or position 1. Identify the author’s assumptions 2. Identify the types of support 3. Determine the relevance of the support 4. Determine the author’s objectivity 5. Determine the argument’s completeness The last few steps (validity and credibility) have already been assessed. Just use substantiation from those FOUR “body” sections to complete the above list. I have provided an Author’s Argument PowerPoint in this assignment. Please review it because there are specific discussions and questions provided to clarify any misgivings conjured in this portion of the argumentative conclusion. Be sure to meticulously follow ALL directions given for this argumentative conclusion segment. This caution is extremely imperative because you don’t want to ignite a deleterious deliberation that disintegrates the nexus of ALL dogmas associated with the pros and cons of your controversial issue. Remember that writing an argumentative essay requires complete objectivity. This disposition is also executed in the conclusion. Be careful NOT to provide subjective reasoning to each author’s purpose and author’s argument disclosed. Lastly, make sure your assessments in this conclusion segment are venerable and epistemologically correct. If not, you will risk creating conclusive responses that reflect a tawdry and meretricious intent!