More handpicked essays just for you.
Disadvantages of critical thinking
Importance of critical thinking and problem solving
Critical thinking pros and cons
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The editorial I chose to analyze was “Should elderly drivers face different licensing rules” by Scott Martelle from the Los Angeles Times. The Toulmin Model of Argument is essential to writing a good argumentative editorial, paper, or article. I will be using the Toulmin Model formula and breaking it down into its six parts to analyze this editorial. The Toulmin model was created by Stephen Toulmin, a former British logician and now a college professor at the University of Southern California. Toulmin, himself found trouble applying basic logic to everyday arguments. Toulmin proceeded to create an improved model of practical reasoning and the understanding of arguments. The first stage of the Toulmin model consists of three parts: claim, data, …show more content…
While the Qualifier is the degree of certainty with which the claim is made. Words like “most, some, none and a few” are types of qualifiers used more often than words that included everyone like “all”. It’s easier to say some people like the beach than saying all people like the beach. The Rebuttal is all exceptions to the claim. It is necessary to address all the opposing viewpoints and limitation to your current argument. The author can also strengthen their argument this way by discussing how these weakness can strengthen their argument. In the editorial “Should elderly drivers face different licensing rules”, the claim is stated at the end of the second paragraph. The conclusion of the argument is as following, elderly drivers are tested in California every five years on their driving skills and must pass their written and vision test in order to keep their license but the rules need to be stricter in order to avoid further car incidents with elderly drivers. It is also written in the editorial that the rules can become more stricter by the simple act of a legislature or a ballot measure. The claim that is being made is a claim of policy. The claim of policy is we should have stricter …show more content…
Writers realize that counter arguments do exist and are very likely to appear. It shows that the writer understands its audience may include those for and against the argument. Dealing with counter arguments is also a great way to build and strengthen your own argument. Martelle states this in his editorial, “We don't know definitively that age was a factor in the accident that occurred when a 100-year-old driver — 101 next week — backed his car into a South Los Angeles street, hitting 11 children and adults and seriously injuring four of them”. The counter argument is that their is no way to prove, the incident occur because of his age. One must remember that car accidents can and do occur everyday from all different age groups. The editorial never specifically states the reason the man crashed his car had anything to do with the fact that he was a older driver. So this statement is a counter-argument of his original statement that older drivers do need stricter rules because their age does affect their driving. The author even continues on by writing, “In general, older drivers are more prudent and take fewer risks than younger ones, and only a low percentage of them are involved in accidents”. Carter's driving record was spotless, according to the DMV.” This proves once again that it isn’t confirmed that the reason he crash was because of his age. The driver wasn’t
An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of facts which clarifies the causes, contexts, and consequences of those facts. This description may establish rules or laws, and may clarify the existing ones in relation to any objects, or phenomena examined. The first piece Bush Remarks Roil Debate over Teaching of Evolution written by Elizabeth Bumiller, is an explanation. Bumiller addresses her points using facts rather than opinions, she also says, “Recalling his days as Texas governor, Mr. Bush said in the interview, according to a transcript, “I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught.”(2), this signifies that this is an explanation and not an argument since he sees both sides instead of choosing one. For
The Toulmin model begins by making a claim. The claim is the main idea of the paper. In other words, the claim is one’s argument. Wilson’s claim states that while there should be more gun control laws, they will not work (Wilson 125). Wilson does not state his claim straight forward. Readers have to read critically to understand what Wilson is claiming. This may be hard for those who do not possess good critical reading skills. Following the claim one must next include his or her stated reasons. The stated reasons are the reasons that one takes the position he or she does on the argument topic. In an argumentative paper there can be a numerous amount of stated reasons. The number of stated reasons in an essay all depends on the writer. Wilson chose to include two stated reasons. His first stated reason as to why more gun controls will not work is, “Legal restraints on the lawful purchase of guns will have little effect on the illegal use of guns” (Wilson 125). Wilson was very straight forward with his first stated reason. His second stated reason was stated differently. Readers would again have to read critically to figure out his second stated reason...
The author is trying to persuade readers to his opinion that vaccinations should be required. The majority of the claims are opinion based, with factual evidence used as support. The logical argument of preventing deaths via vaccinations is used, however the article is also purposely introducing fear and guilt. The facts used could sway a reader to the author’s side by making them fear the other option. The article argues it is a citizen's responsibility to be vaccinated, and that not doing so could hurt innocent bystanders. Both these statements conduce an emotional response. The evidence use to support the article is supported by similar facts from other sources but is not well cited within the article nor is an opposing viewpoint addressing the possible consequences of vaccinating mentioned.The information is clearly presented but is meant to create an emotional reaction and does not cite many direct sources or address the opposing
... the measure would cost millions of dollars for enforcement. Added sentences explaining each argument set forth by the author of the article would have strengthened the argument against proponent rebuttals. For example, “Measure Q would prohibit development in SLO County of medicines like insulin used by diabetics, and treatments such as for cancer, AIDS/HIV, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease”[2] could have been included to explain why the banning of lab research would be a problem. I feel that my decision to vote against the measure was the right choice, but I do not think that this article could convince me if I was undecided or for Measure Q.
Rivera’s argument also passes the test of relevance because the truth of his claim that drunk driving fatalities have nothing to do with the drunk driver’s nationality relate to the truth of his reason that drunk driving fatalities occur because people, not just illegal immigrants, drive drunk.
Stephen Toulmin noticed that good realistic arguments consist of six actual parts. The extended method includes claims, data, and warrants, but it includes backing, qualifications, and a rebuttal, which are used to test the authority of a given warrant. The backing takes the warrants and adds additional evidence and reasoning to validate the warrant. With backing a warrant, there must be a way of qualifying statements expressing the degree to which the speaker defends a claim or to limit the strength of the argument to its truth. There is never just one view or one side of an argument, there are counter-arguments or statements called rebuttals that indicate the circumstances when the general argument does not hold true.
Irvine, Martha. (2008, September 9). HuffPost Business. “Teen Driving Age Should Be Raised, Says Auto Safety Group.”
The idea of changing the legal driving age has been around for several years. Although no concrete decisions have been made, several people have proposed that the legal driving age should be moved from 16 years of age, to 18. With several statistics concerning the percentages of teens who have been in a motor vehicle accident, many parents are quick to jump on board with changing the legal driving age. Yet there are two sides to every story, and teenagers have been able to make several strong arguments that support the idea of keeping the legal driving age the same. After analyzing both sides of the argument, it is clear to see that the logical answer would be to keep the legal driving age at 16 years old, instead of changing it to 18. Although
...the government needs to be harsher on those that break laws against sex crimes. In addition, the writers have used descriptive language to appeal to their audience; by using certain words to describe sex trafficking and its problems, they can evoke emotions that cause their readers to agree that so far, there has not been enough done to punish those involved in sex trafficking. Although the writers have successfully proved their claim, it would have been easier to determine whether the writers were credible if the readers were able to look into the background of a specific author and if the writers had mentioned the counterargument or at least given information about why the government has not heavily enforced the laws that they have put into place. By including these two things, they writers would have a slightly more concrete argument.
So they tend to start new activities, visiting family and friends more often, and taking more vacations. Driving is an important part of staying independent do things such as goes shopping, do errands, and visit the doctor (Older Drivers , 2012). Older adults 70 and older have driver’s licenses and they tend to drive fewer miles than younger drivers. Yet, they are driving more miles than in the past and keeping their licenses for a longer period of time. There will be more elderly drivers on the road as the overall population ages (Older Drivers ,
Davis, Robert. “Is 16 too Young to Drive? Growing Numbers Think So.” USA Today. 1 Mar.
The reason why they author thinks the conclusion is valid because it creates an impartial and regulated community.
Sixteen year olds have a higher crash rate than drivers of any other age. “ in 2011, teenagers accounted for 10 percent of motor vehicle crash deaths” (Teen Driving Statistics). For this purpose, Many states have begun to raise the age limit by imposing restrictions on sixteen years old drivers. For example, limiting the number of passengers they can carry while driving. “The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety released a report in May 2012 that showed that the risk of 16- or 17-year old drivers being killed in a crash increases with each additional teenage passenger in the vehicle. The risk increases 44 percent with one passenger; it doubles with two passengers, and quadruples with three or more passengers. The study analyzed crash data and the number of miles driven by 16- and 17-year olds” (Teen Driving Statistics). Another example, is that many people believe that teenage drivers have a race boy/girl mentality. This mean that when any teenager gets into a vehicle of any kind they get some type of thrilled or that the driving laws do not accommodate them in any way, shape, or form. They would go drag race ...
Today in the world you see how driving becomes an everyday thing, everybody uses a car to get to the destination they need whether it’s their job or just to go out. Many out there have their driver’s license, while others are just starting to learn how to drive to obtain their driver’s license. Everybody has always had an issue with what the right age should be to allow people to obtain their driver’s license and drive. While some people don’t argue with the age that teenagers should be allowed to drive, others don’t agree on letting teenagers get their driver’s license at such young age. People had always had various good reasons on why the driving age should be adjusted or why it should be left as it is. In my opinion and what I think is
In the article Crash Facts on the 16- to 19- Year-Old Age Group, written by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, it is stated that 11.1 percent of sixteen year old drivers are involved in car accidents. Sixteen year olds are less experienced and are accident prone 2.43 percent more than eighteen year olds. According to Ted Gregory, a Chicago Tribune reporter, in New Jersey, teenagers start driving at the age of seventeen unlike other states with a driving age of sixteen. After the law was enacted, the percentage in fatal accidents dropped 33 percent. This report proves that as teenagers get older, car accidents are less likely to happen. Many would argue that age is just a number and eighteen year olds cause many car accidents as well. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation reported that in comparison to sixteen year olds, eighteen year olds are less likely to be involved in car accidents, with a rate of 8.67 percent. Sixteen year old drivers who are involved in car accidents are more likely than older drivers to cause accidents due to carelessness on the