Upon doing a Toulmin analysis of my essay the structures is as follows: my reason is to evaluate my two types of patriotism and support for our troops, my warrants are several comparisons, my evidence are examples of those who are truly patriotic and the falsely patriotic, my qualifiers are stating the two terms can coincide, my conditions of rebuttal are allowing some tangible representation to be acceptable with true patriotism, and my response is these representations should be use sparingly and are never enough by themselves to evoke true patriotism.
After reviewing my essay I realized that I could have done better. My evidence is lacking because does not involve any factual scenarios only conjured situations. The conditions of rebuttal were not entirely responded to and some of my scenarios were sketchy. If I had prior knowledge of the Toulmin analysis I believe essay could have had more cohesiveness and better structure in my essay.
In a revision my weakest argument (which is that soldier’s are there by choice) would have been completely removed and replaced with another subject. I might touch-base this ideal but with little enthusiasm. Some additional evidence I can offer for my warrants are actual examples of falsified patriotism rather than just abstract scenarios. This would help further develop my definitions of patriotism and supporting our troops.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment