Take the same individual you argued for, and argue against them. Use at least 3 facts as to why they would NOT help build the community.
Also, pick one person that one of your classmates argued for, and tell us why you think they are a really good choice. Additionally, talk about how their presentation convinced you to vote for them (this could be in the 1st or 2nd round).
What do you think is the most important component of the Argumentation Theory? Why?
As always, 250 words!
Your loving PA,
Jake
p.s. Don't all just use Greg Mortenson!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
J.K. Rowling would, without a doubt, be the worst person to have on a deserted island. Rather than helping to build a society or hunt for food, J.K. would instead have her head up in a cloud, dreaming about Crumple-Horned Snorkacks or the rules of quidditch. Caught up in her fictional world, J.K. would be of no use on the island. Second, consider the fact that she would be a nuisance to the community by constantly subjecting the others to her stories about Harry Potter. These stories would cause nothing but annoyance and animosity in a fragile group of hungry, deserted survivors. Lastly, J.K. Rowling has no experience with working with others, governments, nor survival. She hides away in her castle writing fantasy novels, which would not in any way benefit those deserted on the island.
I think that Monica did a great job arguing for Princess Diana. While Princess Di initially seems like a terrible pick for island survival, Monica made several solid points. While Princess Di may not be able to tackle grizzly bears, she’s a social asset. She stood up to ridicule and judgment, which makes her a strong person. People around the world loved her, which is a testament to her personality. It’s important to have someone likeable, who everyone is willing to talk to and who will help keep the peace on the island. She was also a part of the government in England (if just symbolically), so she would have positive input on setting up a society. In addition to this, Princess Di was very fashionable, so we would have the best-dressed desert island anyone’s ever seen.
The most important component of argumentation is Qualifier. This states that you must be forceful in your defense. If you are strong and sure of yourself in your presentation and your language, even if your points are weak or you’re stuck with a bad topic or side to argue, others will be more likely to agree with you. So, if you have to argue that J.K. Rowling is a GREAT person to be stuck with on a desert island, sound sure of what you’re saying and people might just believe you ;)
Greg Mortenson might actually not be the best person to have on a deserted island. Greg is out of shape and just not physically fit for helping anyone else survive. He is also way too spacey. He is not good with staying on track; he would always be busy in the tent thinking about schools and not about how to get off the island. Plus, if he went missing, everyone would think he was in on some mountain in Pakistan... no one would ever look for him on an island.
I think John argued Ghandi really well. Being on a deserted island would be stressful and people would definitely start to argue and fight. Although Ghandi often appeared frail and physically unfit for surviving on an island, having someone there to keep the peace and be reasonable at all times would be very helpful. Plus, he could handle not eating much and saving food for the rest of the stranded people. His presentation was convincing because he was very passionate about Ghandi’s presence on the island. He also had a lot of good arguments, too.
I think the most important component of the Argumentation Theory is the “Data” component. It is the most important because stating your opinion is simple, but actually having data to back up your opinion will make or break your argument. If you have nothing to say to support your argument, you cannot prove anything. The person arguing you will completely dominate the conversation. ‘If the glove don't fit you must ACQUIT.’
For all the reasons why Harriet Tubman would be an excellent survivor on an island in all actuality she would not be. To survive on an island an individual must be fearless and a great provider of resources. Harriet Tubman is a woman of slavery who could not survive with being in slavery. She feared slavery to the point of running away from the plantation in the south of Maryland. As she, Harriet Tubman, being driven by fear to run away, this would not make her less as a person to survive on an island. I would believe that surviving on an island would have occurrences of struggle where an individual need not to be fearful. Say for instance, a wildlife on the island decide to attack Harriet Tubman just might run away instead of being fearless in fighting back with the wildlife. While Harriet Tubman is fearful she is not the best provider in resources. Firstly, being and coming from slavery Harriet Tubman is an individual that has little to nothing to survive on an island with. Secondly, she ran from slavery with the help of a white woman and not on her own. To survive on an island a person has to be able to explore on his or her own and not with the assistance of another. To finish up, Harriet Tubman struggled with a serious injury, where she was strike in the head by an overseer on the plantation in south causing her to fall into deep asleep periodically throughout the day.
Greg Mortenson would be an excellent survivor on an island. His past influences his survival skills. His past actions demonstrate being fearless and being a provider of resources. Fearless in climbing mountains to providing a numerous amount of schools, Greg Mortenson is best fit for survival. It takes the will and dedication to climb mountains after many failed attempts and to build schools for villages suffering in poverty therefore him being placed on island is best. Alicia’s argument best supported what is takes to survive on an island. Not only by her picking Greg Mortenson she also gave excellent characteristics of his determination, giving, and the fact of him being a nurse which persuaded me vote of him.
I believe the most important factor of the Argumentation Theory is warrant. Warrant is how data backup claim. Without information supporting a claim the defense is weak. Warrant in essential in persuading an argument in defense.
Oprah may have her own show, magazine, book club, and school for girls in Africa, but she would be a terrible companion on a deserted island. Yes, Oprah faced adversity in her past, and it has obviously made her stronger due to the empire she has built, but I think Oprah’s ego would pose difficulties when trying to get off an island. I think Oprah’s ego as well as her need to be a leader would cause more difficulty than anyone would want to endure when already facing the agony of being stranded on an island. Lastly, Oprah is not the fittest individual. Oprah lives a life of luxury; she is not used to having to do everything for herself, as she would have to on the island. I cannot picture Oprah gathering sticks and logs to build a shelter. I think she would rather boss everyone else around, but this would most likely result in her companions turning against her and becoming annoyed.
I think that Roger’s argument for the tennis player, Arthur Ashe, was well argued and convincing. Ashe was a prominent African American tennis player and is remembered for his efforts in civil rights as well as AIDS. An athlete would benefit others on an island because he could gather food and build shelter fairly easily. Ashe’s work as a civil rights leader means he had leadership skills, which are important when trying to pull together a stressed group in unfamiliar surroundings. Ashe possessed perseverance because he faced health issues during his life and fought against them, making him a stronger individual. His perseverance would be beneficial for the island community because no matter what obstacle Ashe and his companions faced, Ashe would have an optimistic approach and come up with a plan to get them off the island and work together as a community.
Data is the most important component of the Argumentation Theory because one cannot pose an argument without having any information on the subject. Accurate data is vital in convincing others.
When most individuals think of Mother Teresa, they probably see an incredibly old woman, wrinkled with age and a life consisting of many hardships. That description fits the image of Mother Teresa I also had in mind when I picked her as the person I most admire. Upon finding out the role our chosen person would play, all I could envision was Mother Teresa walking through the desert, falling over dead from heat exhaustion. She probably wouldn’t be the best candidate to unite and lead a society on a desert island. She is just too old. Sure she may have won the Noble Peace Prize, but I don’t think she’s cut out to butcher rabbits and spear fish. Mother Teresa would be more of a hindrance than a help. Her words of wisdom wouldn’t save her from the blazing sun and starving coyotes. In fact, since her feet were deformed from giving all the orphans the top footwear, someone from the island society would probably have to carry her.
The person I thought would be helpful on a desert island was Opera. She might not be the most physically fit individual, but she sure is loved by millions. Frances won me over with her speech: “If Opera was missing on a desert island, think of all the people that would be looking for her.” As a society on a desert island, we’d probably only have enough time to take a quick look around before being discovered. Being on a desert island with Opera would be like a vacation cut short. At least with Mother Teresa we could have a few nights to bond as a society and sing campfire tunes.
This is already 250 words, so-- I believe the most important component of argumentation is your backing. Without references and proof, your claim would have no merit. No merit, no argument.
Abraham Lincoln would be a horrible companion to be stuck on an island with. His age would quickly become an issue, as the Lincoln who I picked as my admirable figure was an old man. What he gained his expertise for was leading from a far. Even then, his leadership experience is in leading a military, not a small group of people. He would also be incredibly unaware of how to live in the modern world, and would speak to everyone in his ye old language from back in the day, which nobody would fully understand. He also clearly lacks some survival skills, as he couldn’t even make it through a play alive. Abraham Lincoln would not be at all helpful.
I thought that Sam’s choice of Lance Armstrong was a strong one. He would be very beneficial to all the people on the island. Not only does he bring the strengths of an athlete, but he is also a very strong, persevering man. He went from the brink of death from cancer to a world-class athlete. And he also became a world class athlete in a grueling sport that requires a lot of patience, which is a trait that would help him, and everyone around him on the island.
I believe the most important aspect of argumentation is data. When people are provided with data, they are more likely to consider a claim relevant. It is also important to provide data that has enough of a lasting impact on your audience to make them side with you over your opponent.
Arthur Ashe has always been my go to guy when I needed to look up to someone inspirational. But since the situation presented is a lot different that what I am normally used to, Arthur Ashe wouldn’t really be the best choice. Although he was an athletic tennis player, that was only during his prime. Once he got AIDS, he body began failing him, making him really weak. His body probably would also not be able to withstand all the hardships that coexist on a deserted island. Furthermore, from his biography that I read in 7th grade, I remembered that he talked about not getting along with rowdy people. Although if you know who John McEnroe is, then it could be understandable why it was hard to get along with him, but Ashe has trouble controlling him because I feel like Ashe was too nice of a person to be able to control a society.
If I had another choice, I would of chose Genghis Khan, which was Cooper’s choice. I thought Genghis Khan is such a great choice because he was a very strong willed and strong physical person. He was one person and he united a whole Mongol empire and tried enforcing a lot of foreign policy, which was quite nonexistent back then. These two characteristics showed how someone who lived in the 11th century could be so innovative when everyone else was just trying to be self-sufficient. It also showed how good of a leader he was. He lived a military/nomadic life meaning that he could adapt, cope, and live in new places that he was not familiar with.
I believe that the most important component of argumentation is the warrant. Warrant is the data backing up the claim. Everyone can make a claim and everyone can find data to back that claim up. But how is all connects together is the warrant. How that data is proving the claim is what makes everything seem correct.
Edgar Allan Poe is without a doubt the single worst person to be stranded on a deserted island with. While often described as having been scholastically brilliant, as evidenced by his writing, he was also an alcoholic and addicted to opium. Having suffered the tragedy of losing both his biological parents at a young age and openly despised by his adoptive father, he suffered from depression, and women around him had an odd habit of developing tuberculosis and passing away. Ladies, I don't think we want to die of TB while stuck on a deserted island with this depressing sod. He has his merits (I mean come on...scary campfire stories would be his SPECIALTY) but that'd be about it.
I believe that David's suggestion of William Wallace would be a far better companion on a deserted island. We are talking, after all, about the Scot who nearly single handedly led an army that went on to defeat the English Army at Stirling. (Thank you, wikipedia.) Obviously the original Braveheart had stunning leadership ability and a keen mind for strategy. His physical strength would come in handy, building a shelter while his keen mind would eventually help to devise an escape from the island and under his passionate leadership we could surely come together as one and accomplish our goals. (Though Alysha did a great job supporting JK and Monica did an equally great job supporting Princess Di. I'm jealous. :])
The best and most important component of an argument is the rebuttal. How else do you expect to win an argument if you don't know what to expect from your opponent? Being able to look at both sides of an argument, objectively, helps a person figure out whether or not they have the best stance in the argument, or if they have to go and gather more facts. :)
Despite his impact on the world while he was alive, I highly doubt Mohandas Gandhi would be a good choice to bring on a deserted island. First of all, he's old and weak, so he can't really do any manual labor, secondly, yes, he is peaceful, but sometimes you need an enforcer and with Gandhi's beliefs he would never allow himself to get out of control and angry at someone. Lastly, even though he has the ability to go on hunger strikes for weeks on end it doesn't really help the rest of us when we're starving and looking for food.
One person that stood out in my mind that would be a great person to have on the island was Lance Armstrong. Aside from the fact that he is very physically fit, the man survived cancer and won the Tour de France 7 times in a row, I'm pretty sure he'd be able to handle living on a deserted island. Also, he brings in the celebrity factor, people would be looking for him, maybe not as much as they would for Oprah, but still more than people would look for Jake. Unfortunately, seeing as I made it to the final round I did not get the chance to vote for Lance, but if I wasn't as amazing at arguing for Gandhi as I had been I definitely would have voted for Mr. Armstrong.
I think there are two major important aspects of the Argumentative Theory that is pertinent to having a good argument. The first is warrant. If you cannot tell us how your data relates to the topic it does not matter how much data you have. The second is rebuttal. Know thine enemy is a cliche perfect for argument. If you don't know what you're arguing against there is no possible way you can be prepared for what your opponent will say back to you.
That is all, fortunately this time I used word count and this will be my only post seeing as my 250th word was 91 words ago.
I don’t think Marin Luther King Jr. would be a good person to have on the island at all. For the main reason that he lacks major athletic ability and anyone who is going to be able to survive on a desert island must possess this ability. Another reason that he wouldn’t be fit for this scenario is that he is non-confrontational and he might have a problem confronting others who would make poor decisions for the island. Argument is an important part of decision-making and keeping order, but his passive personality could create problems if he never stood up to those more confrontational and made bad decisions. Lastly, he lives by strong beliefs that could clash with others’ beliefs on the island. Thus creating an island of division that would not be successful in working together to survive.
I really think Oprah could be a good choice to pick to have on an island. Many people don’t know this, but she has been through some tremendous hardships in her life. These hardships ranged anywhere from sexual abuse to poverty. She is an extremely strong individual ad she would prove to be a tough enough person to survive on an island. In the presentation of Oprah for the island, I was impressed with the rebuttal when some thought she wouldn’t be a good candidate. The fact that she is famous and many people would look for her really impressed me too.
I think the most important part of argumentation is the warrant. This explains how your data backs up your claim. While data is very important to an argument, I don’t think it’s the most important part. A person could have the latest and most valid pieces of evidence lying right in front of them, but if they can’t argue how any of it proves their point, it’s completely useless. Vice versa, someone with far less evidence could convince someone of an argument if they can effectively use what they have to prove their point with a good warrant.
Even though Princess Diana was always a person to lend a helping hand, she was not one that was always stable. Diana had a lot of personal problems that she did not handle in the most efficient way. At times she let her personal life, interfere with her public life. Breaking socialite rule number one, never expose your personal life to the public. Also if she was not weighing us all down with her emotional stress she would probably be too focused on making us all appear socially appealing with the latest fashion trends.
However, I believe that John's argument for Ghandi, was impressive. I believe that Ghandi would be a great person to have around if you were stuck on a deserted island. He was great at keeping and attempting to keep peace in his country and with his people. Surely if people were stuck on an island I'm sure they would be freaking out and at their wits end. I think John's calm demeanor in arguing for Ghandi, help win me over. The way he presented his points were similar in how Ghandi would speak and still be taken seriously. Calm, Cool, Collected.
The most important component of argumentation for me is the presentation of Data. Without the backing of facts people will not believe you or take you seriously. Secondly, without information or background knowledge how will anyone ever know anything about the person or issue that your trying to argue for?
First of all I wanted to congratulate Jake “our loving PA” for coming up with such a fun and educational activity on the spot like that. I had a great time with this activity and I hope everyone else did as well.
My historical figure was Genghis Khan. To be quite frank I think that my group pretty much hit on the major weaknesses of the great Khan during round 1. I couldn’t do a better job of making Genghis Khan look like a bloodthirsty mass murderer if I tried. Some of the best ideas that I would have used against Genghis Khan are as follows. 1. Genghis Khan is probably one of the most horrifically violent figures in history. 2. In a modern day setting some one like Genghis Khan would have no idea how to get rescued on a dessert island. 3. He’s not exactly the best social leader we could pick for the job, he ruled more by brute strength than skill.
My favorite person who tried to be on the island had to be Mother Teresa! It was really amusing to listen to the reasons that Brittany gave for Mother Teresa being a good choice for the island. At the time I had a hard time believing that an old woman would do well on a dessert island just because she is kind and loving but upon further examination ive rethought that decision. Mother Teresa spent a lot of her life in extreme climate conditions, giving most of her food water and clothing to those who were needier than her. In other words a desert island is basically her everyday life! She would have done great out there.
As far as the theory of argumentation is concerned, Data is the most important component by far. This is because with out the hard data your opinion is meaningless. People are free to think what ever they want, but if they don’t have facts to back them up everyone else is free to think they’re crazy.
Thanks for reading guys
-cooper
I think that although William Wallace did lead the revolt against England, he probably wouldn’t make for a great compainion on a deserted island. For starters, he lived a good 800 years ago so communication would be tough. And even though for his age he was considered very smart and intelligent, I’m sure that his knowledge back then is probably somewhat common sense now-a-days. And lastly He would probably be thinking and morning the lost of his wife all the time and wouldn’t be much help for anything because he’ll be thinking of her. Ever since she died he had somewhat of a death wish and probably wouldn’t care either way if we survived.
I think That Cooper did a great job arguing Genghis Khan and I think that he would make a good person to have on and island (even though the speech thing might hinder him a little) he grew up on the Steppes and therefore is use to the harsh climates that comes with a deserted island. He is also a very dedicated leader and would see us getting rescued as best he could. And although he was a brutal leader, I think that he treats his own a lot nicer than he would his enemies.
As far as theory of argumentation goes, I think that data is the most important because without the data, your claim is nothing more than an idea. You can think whatever it is that you want, but for others to believe you, you have to be able to back it up.
Martin Luther King was a great human being, great American, and someone who significantly changed the world for the better. It is difficult to argue against someone like MLK, but I will try. He would not be the best person to have on a desert island. He may have been a great orator and a great leader but his words of kumbaya would not register with those fighting each other for food and resources. MLK would not go around searching for food, instead he would tell all of those in "Gilligan's" group to stop their petty arguing and fighting and come together. After a while the inspirational speeches will probably get old. MLK was also a minister, and many on the island will probably lose faith in God and do not want him to give sermons or mention the almighty as he does quite often.
Genghis Khan is my pick. His Royal Highness Cooper did an excellent job making his case for the Mongolian conqueror. Khan lived virtually his entire as nomad who sometimes had to survive on horse blood so he should have no trouble finding food during a scarce time. He would go from village to village and show his authority. He knew that a certain amount of violence and intimidation in one village would silence all the nearby towns. That means that if someone acts of line and is unproductive on the island he will make an example out of that person. This also ties into his leadership skills. For most of his adult life he was able to lead an army across most of Asia and parts of Europe that always remained loyal to him. Because of this he will be respected by the islanders who will follow his lead and relay on his wisdom to make the best of a very bad situation.
The Qualifier is the most important component of argumentation. It is extremely important to have a forceful defense of your position with proof to back it up. If you defend your opinion with force and clearness it is way more believable.
Lance Armstrong would not be the best person to have on an island. The one thing he is best known for is cycling and I must admit, his bike is not going to be of any use on a deserted island. He does not have any leadership skills either. He would not be the right person for the job. I think his ego might get in the way too, which would not be good for everone else. We need somone who really knows what they are doing. Someone who would be able to build a society and help us through the struggles on the way.
I think Alysha did a great job arguing J.K. Rowling. I realize that she would be a borrible person to be stuck on an island with, but Alysha did a great job arguing her points. If I would have been able to vote the second round, I would most definately have voted for her. It was very obvious she was on debate in high school. I liked how she took the author in a book and somehow convinced me that she would be a great person to be stranded on an island with. Alysha's biggest point that really convinced me was when she said how J.K. Rowling made up this whole society that brought millions from all over the world into it. Alysha then took that fact and said how Rowling would be able to build a society on the island. I think the point of that assignment was to convince others why your person would be great for the island by backing it up with strong facts. Alysha, I believe, was the best at this.
Greg Mortenson would be, by far the best person to have on an island. I agree with all the points that were brought up in class. He is a very intelligent man, has been in several different climates, cultures and places and is also a nurse. I think being a nurse would be one of the most beneficial qualitites to have on the island. He also built the school so why would he not be able to build a society and a place for us to live. I think most everyone agrees with having Greg Mortenson on an island for all the obvious reasons. Let's just hope this senerio would never happen!
Despite the courage that Rosa Parks had presented throughout the Black Movement and the memorable mark she left on our society and culture, I really don't feel that she would be a great candidate to survive on a deserted island. She became famous when she was in her old age. An elderly woman, no matter how brave she may be, would not be of any help on an island. She would not be physically fit, nor would she be able to react fast to any type of danger.I also feel that she would be too pushy and not want to compromise with anyone else and their ideas. Rosa Parks was an incredible woman but would be less than extraordinary at surviving on a deserted island.
Greg Mortenson, however, would make a great companion on a deserted island. I know you told us not to use Greg, but I'm only the second one to defend him so I figured it would be okay. I was very impressed with the argument that was made by Alicia. He was definitely not a hard person to defend, giving the fact that he is such an outdoorsman and has experience in building structures as well. He seems like a well-rounded guy who would be able to get along with everyone as well.
I feel that Qualifier is the most important component of argumentation. You must be forceful with what you were saying. If you are as persuasive as you can be, who knows, people might actually believe you.
[size=72][color=red][url=http://www.go4you.net/go.php?sid=24]ENTER ON SOFTWARE PORTAL[/url][/color][/size]
[size=46][color=red][url=http://www.go4you.net/go.php?sid=24]DOWNLOAD SOFT![/url][/color][/size]
[img]http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4762671/2/istockphoto_4762671-software-box.jpg[/img]
[size=46][color=red][url=http://www.go4you.net/go.php?sid=24]OEM SOFTWARE[/url][/color][/size]
[size=72][color=red][url=http://www.go4you.net/go.php?sid=24]DOWNLOAD SOFTWARE[/url][/color][/size]
[size=72][b]Online Intero soft Mac OS x[/b][/size]
[size=72][b]Online Intero software on Mac[/b][/size]
[size=72][b]Buy Intero software Mac OS x[/b][/size]
http://www.google.com/
Post a Comment