1. Identify the specific argument that Paine is making in each paragraph. For each of the arguments, identify whether Paine is making an emotional, ethical, or logical appeal and suggest an effective counterargument.
#1
It will be tough but we must go to war. Emotional in the first part and then ethical. What if you don’t win the war? Begging the question. Uses aphorism.
#2
If they have faith in God they will win. Dogmatic belief which is an ethical appeal. What if God isn’t on their side? Begging the Question. How do we know what side God is on . Analogy: comparing the king to criminals.
#3
That separation is going to happen anyways. Do it now, so your children don’t have do it later
Logical and emotional (helping your kids) appeal : ethical: this is what a good parents would do, would take care of problem so the children have a good life.
Counter argument: you are choosing for them but maybe they are better for the split- not giving them a choice- better for the children to fight the war if they win. What if you lose-your children won’t like the freedom? What if your parents die in the war, is it better for your children.
Logical fallacies: begging the question
#4
Argument: Why do we have to take Britain taking everything from us? Comparing a king to a thief- we should fight I king for doing that because we would fight a thief for doing that too
Appeal: logical and ethical
Logical fallacies: faulty analogy
2. Can you identify any of the logical fallacies that we discussed in Paine’s arguments? If so, which ones? Overall, what do you feel are the strengths and weaknesses of Paine’s arguments?
Weaknesses: not a lot of facts to back up.
No comments:
Post a Comment