Immigration is a tough topic to discuss for many people because of the opposing views that come with it. In the two essays "California Needs a 'Time-Out' from Immigration" and "Revamp Immigration," they each explain their points of views about this controversial topic. One points out the flaws in immigration and tried to mend it through inclusive means whereas the other points of these flaws also but see how a continuation of them will cause further damage to the United States. Immigration, in general, is hard to reach a conclusion for because this conclusion will hurt some group of people. Thus, many other articles about this topic have risen to the surface, as well. Many, nonetheless, use a form of fallacies to make their argument seem like the better option. However, if it is addressed by those who can make a difference with it, then the path to the real solution may surface, not because others were tricked to accept that conclusion but is a universal agreement between the nation.
I believed this topic was very interesting due to the opposing views of each essay and how they seek to fix the problem. As a reader, it is important to know when a writer or speaker is using fallacies to lead a reader to be persuaded to accept their conclusion without actual evidence. When finding these fallacies, one can determine if the argument the writer claim is any weaker without these deceiving additions, in which it usually is. Although as a writer, I must make sure to not use these fallacies in my own writing for they may seem like they help, but without evidence to back them, it is no use to the argument I am trying to make.
No comments:
Post a Comment