Never accept an argument solely because of what is argued!!

The ideas in chapter 13 remind me of my love for persuasive writing. I am a student of the law. I admire, think, and write about the law. Legal writing is founded on the power to argue and persuade using logic. The discussion of ethos in chapter 13 can be echoed in a legal writing class because the power of an argument is not only based upon the words, but upon the unspoken characteristics of a given piece, such as the authority and expertise of the author, the tone and strategies employed, the author’s connection to the topic, and the context. While the editorials offered as examples in the chapter are not legal writings, they are meant to persuade. For example, the argument over affirmative action is one in which either side attempts to discredited the others argument by pointing out logical flaws. A great example of this is Mr. Ogletree’s counter argument to the idea that test scores are an effective way to judge a candidate’s possibilities. He counters this by pointing out that the argument takes for granted that all who take the test have been privy to the same opportunities and thus everyone who takes the test are standing on equal footing.

The editorial pieces showcased in chapter 13 all share a common goal--to persuade their respective audiences. This chapter emphasizes the importance of not just accepting a writer’s position, but to think about the writer’s qualifications and purpose for writing this piece. The preceding idea for critical analysis has been something that I have struggled with in the past. I was always one who believed or accepted an argument on its face value, which is not always a great idea.