- Magical Dependency
- After reading “A Price Too High,” use a Reply to the Magical Dependency page to demonstrate your understanding of the power of dependency.
- Nuclear Power Rebuttal Argument
- While reading “A Price Too High,” about the nuclear power accident at Fukushima Japan, use a Reply to the Agenda TUE MAR 28 page (that’s this one) to outline the arguments FOR or AGAINST building new nuclear power plants.
- “A Price Too High”
- Ag-Gag Laws: A Resource
- Reading and viewing material to prepare for class on THU MAR 30.
-independent clauses can stand on their own to be complete sentences
-you can take two sentences and subordinate one to the other
-if you flip the independent and the dependent clauses you can prove different claims
“A Price Too High” Exercise
FOR: global warming makes it look appealing because there are no greenhouse gases, sense of power, rarity of accidents is comforting
AGAINST: risk of an event like the one in Japan happening, very expensive, plants are usually abandoned and money and time is wasted, tons of nuclear waste, dangerous to the people, water becomes radioactive which harms that water for our lifetime
We can’t afford to build something catastrophic because the more that we have, the closer we get to certainty of something terrible happening, and increasing our risk.
Good day for you, Chippy. So happy to have you in “the twelve.”
Today’s class we switched gears to the final writing point, the rebuttal phase, in which we must try and balance a cause with an effect or a positive with a negative. Began to discussed claimed and flipped claims and how independent and dependent clauses affect how the claims come off as.
-it is a very simple process to take two sentences and subordinate one to the other
-subordinate the objection
-“A Price Too High” arguments:
-the concern of global warming although it has increased the appeal of nuclear power, it does not produce the high levels of greenhouse gases that come from fossil fuels
-nuclear reactors are being shut down for more than a year due to safety reasons
-too expensive: cost overruns- argue by asking what difference does it make
“subordinate the objection” is genius, starbucks.
Refutation to your claim, but also emphasizes your claim
-if the grammar is correct
-independent clauses can stand on its own as a sentence, the dependent clauses need the independent clauses to finish its sentence
-subordinate the objection to the dependent cause
independent clauses is the point you are trying to get across without needing another sentence involved
there are objections to our point of view, but still need to focus on our claim
A Price too high-arguments-
-worst case scenarios unfold more than it seems
-global warming has increase the appeal of nuclear power
– is it a good idea to follow through on plans to increase our reliance on nuclear power
– having one close by to New York is not good (blessed to have few catastrophic accidents and no deaths)
– expensive to change “It offers benefits and big-time shortcomings. Ultimately, the price may be much too high”
Magical Dependency-in class exercise -GET DONE
Nice work, Donuts.
Think of one sentence as a tiny little argument. You usually balance a negative with a positive or a cause and affect.
Independent Clauses Emphasize Claims
They can stand on their own as sentence
Subordinate one from the other. One helps the claim while the other would hurt the claim. The claim flips and there has to be an argument to be made, a logical argument.
Car crashes happen so to say that people shouldn’t drive is not a logical argument
A logical argument would be a program to give free heroin to addicts to lower crime rates, however the heroin addicts would stay addicted. That is a logical argument which can be expanded.
Evidence goes into the argument and that can win an argument in no time. It can always be argued though no matter how much evidence you bring out. Anybody can always claim there’s not enough evidence if they have a dug in belief.
It’s not a rebuttal if the evidence has nothing to do with the argument
Refute the argument by demonstrating that the evidence provided is inconclusive.
Be sure of your evidence
Very nice, NBN.
-read Ag-Gag Laws for Thursday March31st!
-we have deeply held beliefs so we stick to our opinion when an topic comes up that is worth arguing
-cause and effect of a claim made
-independent vs dependent clauses
claim1: since the program lowers the crime rate by giving free heroin to the addicts, it won’t help them end their addiction.
claim1 flipped: while the program doesn’t help addicts end their addiction, it reduces the crime rates in the city by providing the addicts free heroin in the cleanest way possible.
Nuclear Power Rebuttal Argument
-catastrophes happen more frequently then we would like them to
-nature is unpredictable
-does it make sense to increase our reliance on nuclear power this would risk problems occurring in the US
-global warming has increased appeal of nuclear power
-ny gov. andrew cuomo said the nuclear power plant in westcheaster county should be closed
-dozens of instances have happened because of the nuclear reactors and safety reasons
-building new plants requires a lot of money and government loans
-offers benefits and big time shortcomings
Good work, Moana.
-Always acknowledge your opposing points. It’s impossible to write a convincing paper without refuting the best opposing points of view.
-Put the thing you want people to remember at the end of the sentence. As seen with claim 1 and the flipped claim, phrasing is everything.
-Using “while” or “although” can downplay the bad clause in a sentence, and make the other clause sound much more important.
-Arguments A Price Too High for or against nuclear power
First claim is that natural disasters need to be planned for
Another claim is that the more nuclear plants we have, the more likely we are to have a natural disaster.
He says that nuclear power is good because it doesn’t produce greenhouse gasses, but its bad because it has lots of waste, and increases the chance of natural disasters.
Building new plants would be expensive
-The main argument that I saw was that nuclear power can be cleaner to the air, but the risks with the radioactive waste and the chance of a natural disaster are not worth the risk or the price.
-Saying that there is not enough evidence is not a proper rebuttal.
-Similarities DO NOT make two things the same. As seen with the nuclear power plants and the Matrix movies, just because they are similar does not mean that they are the same situation.
When I read your Notes, King, I realize I’ve been too generous with 3/3 grades for some of your classmates. This is quality. Even so, I want to help with something:
Not so. The independent clause can easily come first.
A rebuttal argument should include the strongest objection that goes against our thesis. We have to acknowledge the objections in our paper so that we can change the minds of people who are on the opposing side of our argument. Claiming that an article does [not] have enough evidence is not a valid rebuttal. Anybody can claim that something doesn’t have enough evidence. We have to provide a single piece of evidence that is stronger than the original argument to refute.
Independent clauses emphasize claims, and dependent clauses minimize objections. The sentence will start out with dependent clause, and end with an independent clause that emphasizes our claim.
“A Price Too High” Arguments
-Catastrophes happen more often than we think- a nuclear one could happen at anytime, even though it is rare.
-The price is too high for ratepayers to pay for nuclear plants, not worth the cost
-There is no good place to put nuclear waste
-Nuclear power plants produce less greenhouse gases
Very strong work, Aeks. I continue to be impressed by your ability to hold off on recording notes until you’ve absorbed, synthesized, and summarized the main points.
-Make what is important the independent clause
-To support one claim the other claim must be down played, for example the program will lower crime rates (supports) but the level of addiction will not fall.
It is necessary to take opposing arguments head on within the paper to remove the persuasive value of the opposing argument.
If we ignore them, they are in our readers [readers’] minds the whole time.
DeEmphasize the counter claim by mentioning their claim but also emphasize your claim to delegitimize theirs.
Refer to Magical dependency.
Even though the dog cost me a lot of money in food, it is till a magnificent guard dog.
Nuclear Power Plant
1)Just because there hasn’t been a major catastrophe in the U.S. yet does not mean it wont happen
2)Look what happened in Japan
3)They had emergency shutdowns in the past proving that they are unstable
4)They are old
5)They are expensive
“Not enough evidence” is not a valid argument
Having a card thats better than the opponents card is what you want to argue.
Evidence provided could also be inconclusive
You can win by specifying what has been left out.
Watch out for false analogy’s [analogies]
Point out key differences between Japan catastrophe and U.S. power plant.
Strong and thorough, BlackHawk.
Address the other side’s arguments. It shows you understand the situation. Allows you to refute and minimize the other side’s points.
Dependent clauses minimizes objections. It’s strange how this works but it does. For some reason, the independent clause seems more important. Sentence structure is important when arguing.
Although bad thing, still good thing. Focuses on good.
Although good thing, still bad thing. Focuses on bad.
Saying there is insufficient evidence isn’t a rebuttal without providing more evidence of your own. When creationist say there is always a missing link in the fossil record, and then the link is found, 2 more missing links are created.
Sanchez, I could use your Notes as my own lecture notes. You “get it,” and you take the time to find the right illustration to record “it” for yourself. Your missing link example is absolutely perfect.
-it is vital to mention the counter argument to the research paper’s argument. If we do not do this, then we lose the interest of those who have the counterargument on their mind
-independent clauses emphasize claims, and dependent clauses minimize objections
-we not subordinate the objection, so we mention it but we need to empathize [emphasize] the argument
-claim 2: while the addicts will unfortunately remain decedent [dependent] on heroin, the city will have the opportunity to thrive.
what we want to empathize [emphasize] goes into the independent clause
An example: While the dog wants to kick you out of bed, it is still a magnificent guard dog.
Even though the dog eats 100 pounds of beef in a week, it is still a magnificent guard dog
-acknowledge the section, [objection,] but minimize the importance
Power Plant Argument
-the nuclear plant produces less fossil fuels then [than] other sources
-so in terms of global warming, the nuclear plant is safer
-another argument is, one plant had to be closed down for a year for safety repairs, the argument hear [here] is other energy sources won’t have shut down for a year but to safety
-however the danger is the nuclear waste produced and what to do with all of it
-plant disaster odds are low, but one always has to beg the worst case scenario question
-another downside is the high cost of building the plants
-finished projects, unfinished projects, and other plant costs have cost tax payers a whopping $300 billion.
-it is not an effective rebuttal to request more evidence from the author
-this is because the requests would never end
-it is not the responsibility of the arguer to give enough evidence to convince the person with a dug-in belief; silly evidence won’t change their mind
-the key is to give just enough evidence for overwhelming evidence
-it is also not an effective rebuttal to complain that you really don’t see what the evidence provided has to do with the argument. This is because nothing stops the opposer from refusing to acknowledge the obvious relevance
-it is also not effective to say that the author is unfair to your side of the argument and should offer evidence to support you side
-when a false analogy is made, it is not effective to just say the analogy is false, the effective way is to give a better analogy, once a false analogy comes, a false choice almost always follows
do the in class exercise we did not get to after class
Beautiful work, Green Eggs.
FOR: nuclear power plants provide clean energy that is low in greenhouse gases
and may help the global warming issues.
AGAINST: the plants emit toxic waste, but run the risk of causing massive damage. its very expensive to create a plant.
Student Writer, these belong in the Magical Dependency Replies.
it is important to understand the opposition of your arguments to provide a clear concise understanding of the topic
focus of valid information with strong sentence structure
use magical dependency to provide support for your claim
when making a rebuttal
do not focus on the opinions of the author stick to important information and state it in a non emotional fashion to add validity to the points being discussed.
Interesting stuff, studentwriter. It doesn’t remind me of my own remarks, but I credit you with original and reasonable thinking.