Outcome 3 explores what it takes for a writer to produce complex, analytical, persuasive arguments that contribute to the conversation of existing research and matter in academic contexts. It is important for a writer, when developing a complex and analytical claim, to implement the stakes of the argument, and why the argument matters to their field of research. If the argument has no purpose, then the writers desired audience have no reason to read it. It is also vital for the writer to implement counterarguments throughout their claim to give the audience multiple view points and to let the reader know you have recognized the other sides of the argument, and have taken them into consideration, refuted them, and have therefore produced the
…show more content…
The way I will argue this claim effectively to industrial company leaders, is with a great appeal to the reader’s logic, incorporating statistical and factual evidence supporting and denying my claim, using sources from the other spectrum of the argument as a counter argument to my main claim, as well as encompassing an emotional appeal to the readers as I address the massive loss of jobs, and the effect it will have on the country’s economy. I will use various sources that support both sides of the claim, and use that as a build up throughout my essay until it is resolved by using old evidence and presenting new sources to support my claim.”
Throughout the paper, I elaborate more on the my complex claim, incorporating the stakes of the mechanical industry and its workers, and the counterarguments of my major claim. An example of a counterclaim incorporated in my research proposal is:
“In order for humans and machines to work effectively together, the workers would need to learn how to operate the machinery, and how to manufacture working together. This could take time and cost the company millions.”
This claim refutes my claim, stating that the collaboration between and and machine would take too much time. However, since I addressed the issue, it allows me the opportunity to form a rebuttal, or describe to my audience that I am aware of the possible setbacks not described in my main
The way I will argue this claim effectively to industrial company leaders, is with a great appeal to the reader’s logic, incorporating statistical and factual evidence supporting and denying my claim, using sources from the other spectrum of the argument as a counter argument to my main claim, as well as encompassing an emotional appeal to the readers as I address the massive loss of jobs, and the effect it will have on the country’s economy. I will use various sources that support both sides of the claim, and use that as a build up throughout my essay until it is resolved by using old evidence and presenting new sources to support my claim.”
Throughout the paper, I elaborate more on the my complex claim, incorporating the stakes of the mechanical industry and its workers, and the counterarguments of my major claim. An example of a counterclaim incorporated in my research proposal is:
“In order for humans and machines to work effectively together, the workers would need to learn how to operate the machinery, and how to manufacture working together. This could take time and cost the company millions.”
This claim refutes my claim, stating that the collaboration between and and machine would take too much time. However, since I addressed the issue, it allows me the opportunity to form a rebuttal, or describe to my audience that I am aware of the possible setbacks not described in my main