Analysis Of Scotland And England: A Case In Point By John Jay

In the federalist paper NO. 5 the author the author John Jay makes claims that the states should have a strong Federal government and have the state's answer to the government. In response Scotland and England - a Case in Point was written by “An Observer”, in which they refute Jay’s points written in his paper. The federalist paper in question has the superior argument,by driving his points home, using prior knowledge to compare it to similar scenarios, relaying everything to the audience in concise points, and by actually by having best statements from an argumentative perspective.
The way in which John Jay’s words have more impactful statements is a deliberate choice by the author makes to ingrain the statements into the audience's minds. For example one of his key pieces of evidence is the union of Scotland and England. He chose this because the …show more content…
Since it was published after federalist paper five, it should be able to refute, and nullify the previously made points, while adding new information to sway the audience as a whole into agreeing with them. However it is barely able to refute, let alone nullify the claims of the paper it was written in response to. By only focusing on the argument of Jay and nothing else, it struggles with convincing the audience to pay attention to what their paper is saying. Withouting bringing any new points, or even how to fix what Jay was saying the paper has little to no traction. The paper boils down to have the argumentative integrity of siblings bickering with one and other, by trying to say that his ideas are all wrong and his example were terribly chosen.
Federalist paper number five is clearly the stronger argument because it is clear what their end goal is to help the newly formed nation while Scotland and England - a Case in Point’s goal is the same, however it is almost entirely lost in the author’s attempts to correct John Jay’s