Aidan Kelleher  

Professor Perisse  

ENG 170-10 

Argument Evaluation Critique 

28 April 2023  

Evaluate and respond to the following questions. 

  1. What are the terms (basis) of the debate? (This should be outlined in the introduction in the
    debate paragraph). Write it out here. Is it clear? Will your audience understand it? 

The basis of the debate is whether men and women are equally emotional. This is stated clearly at the end of the introduction paragraph. The audience will be able to follow that this is the topic of the paper. 

  1. How strong is this argument?
     Is the problem worth fixing? Why?
     Is it a credible argument (does it have two strong sides to the debate and has not been
    resolved)? Explain. 
  • This problem is worth fixing because there is an unfair balance between the use of the word emotional in a negative connotation towards women far more than men. The other big problem is the shame of talking about our emotions or displaying emotions that other people do not like.  
  • This is a credible argument that really has three sides to it, thinking women are more emotional, men are more emotional, or they are equally emotional. Although there is scientific research to be done on this topic, because we experience a different range of emotions as one another, the answer is not set in stone, which sparks debate. 
  1. Look for the claims. What are they? (These should be stated as the pro points found in the
    thesis paragraph in the introduction of the paper).
     List them in this critique.
     How well do they argue the author’s position on the debate? Are these valid pro points
    and are they convincing?
     Are they varied and build the argument? How?
     What suggestions do you have for other possible pro points for this argument? 

Claims (List them and how well do they argue the author’s position): 

  • The word emotional has a negative connotation surrounding it but should be attributed to all the different emotions.  
  • This claim does a good job of arguing the author’s position because it is important to deconstruct our perception of the word emotional and what we attach to that word versus what it actually means. It is a valid pro point and effectively convinces the audience that we need to change the way this word is used. 
  • There is a difference between the emotions that we as people feel and the emotions that we choose to express.  
  • This supports the author’s position because the question does not allude to what emotions we outwardly express, but what we feel. It is important to separate the two because while a lot of people would be on the opposite side of the argument from me based on the question alone, when it’s boiled down to whether men or women FEEL the same amount of emotions, most people would take the same stance as I did.  
  • The word emotional is often levied at women more than men, influencing our opinion on the topic.  
  • Like the first claim, this is an important step for the audience to try and forget about the use of the word emotional and what their brain is wired to think of because of the world around them and think harder about what they actually believe to be true. Since the word is often used as an attack more against women than men for displaying the same emotions, it can be easy to associate women with the word and believe that to be true.  

 

  • Are they varied and build the argument: I think that the three pro points are similar in that they are about making the audience think differently than they did before, but I think the intricacies and specifics about the three claims lead to different conversations that are varied and support the central idea.  
  • What suggestions do you have for other pro points to add: Perhaps one point could be about how men experience more of this emotion and another point could be about how women experience more of that emotion. There could be a pro point about trying to equate different experiences and levels of different emotions to see what the scale says.  
  1. Is the author supporting those claims (pro points) with data-supported reasoning from reliable
    credentialed sources.
     Evaluate the sources. Are they credible? Why or why not?
     Suggest what other types of sources would be useful to the author’s argument.
     If the paper lacks any use of sources, discuss the type of supporting evidence that should
    be used for each part of the paper. 

The sources are credible, but the author could use more scholarly sources and journals to support their claims.  The author could also get more out of each source that they have, pulling multiple quotes from each source to support the claims.  

  1. Does the author anticipate objections (con points) to their arguments and pushback and
    incorporate those critiques into their paper?
     List the con points in the critique (found in Body B).
     Do they directly argue against the author’s own pro points? Hint: they should not. How
    can this be remedied? Explain.
     How well does the author successfully counter (refute) these opposing views? Explain. 
  • Con points:  
  • Women are more emotional because they are more empathetic than men.  
  • Men are more emotional because they have a problem controlling their rage.  

They do not argue directly against the author’s pro points, they are separate arguments entirely.  

The author does a good job of countering these arguments by stating that while they are not necessarily wrong, they do not invalidate his central argument. In fact, if they are both true, they actually help to support his stance.  

  1. If the argument went into effect, what would the consequences be?
     Are there faults in the author’s logic? What are they? Why? 

If the argument went into effect, there would probably be a lot of people that would find it ridiculous to say that men and women are equally emotional as one another, and some would say that it is a pointless argument to be having in the 21st century anyway. I would argue that the reason that this is an important conversation is to put an end to the very conversation itself. If we can all agree that men and women are equally emotional, men can feel more comfortable with their emotions, women can stop being attacked for theirs, and we can stop feeling shame for feeling.  

  1. We see what the author is saying, but what are they not saying?
     How what the author is not saying raise a red flag? Explain. 

I don’t think there is anything that the author is purposely not saying. Perhaps he is missing something vital to helping the argument that someone else could point out that he did not think of or consider, but that is where the interesting debate comes in.  

 

  1. Is the author using strategies of ethos, logos, and pathos?
     Find one of each and copy the sentence into this critique and identify what strategy is
    being used in each sentence.
     How effective are these strategies in convincing the audience of the author’s position? 

Ethos:  

The author could do a better job of using ethos in their paper.  

Pathos:  

But being emotional can encompass a variety of feelings that we as humans are capable of and to boil that range down to a select few that are seen as negative emotions brings shame to both the emotions and the word. This shame is what has led to people, especially men, not feeling comfortable discussing those more vulnerable emotions with the people around them out of fear. 

 Logos:  

In other words, emotions are a factor in every part of our lives. Emotions, whether they are under our control or not, are what make us human. 

While they are effective, the author could lean more into the emotional side and use pathos to get the audience to fully understand and care about this topic, because as of now it is talking a lot about emotion without the author making the reader feel that many.  

  1. How well is the paper structured and organized?
     Does the paper contain all the parts of an argument structure? The introduction, body, and
    conclusion. List those parts in the critique and assess them.
     Identify the parts that are missing or need to be better developed to improve the reading
    of the paper.
     What audience is the argument targeting? Profile them. 

Introduction: The author provides a solid introduction and effective hook to engage the reader and make them want to read the rest of the paper. It should just be longer. 

Body: The body paragraphs of the paper are good, they should be more well organized and labeled for the final submission, but they contain effective pro points and good analyses of them. 

Conclusion: The author gives a strong conclusion that could just have a better final sentiment.  

The audience of the argument is people who should reconsider their treatment of their own emotions and the emotions of others. Hopefully, the reader will think twice before they make someone feel shame for expressing their emotions or feel ashamed of themself.  

  1. What is your opinion on this debate and how it was developed?
     Were you familiar with the debate prior to writing the paper? Explain? I was familiar with the topic prior to writing the paper as I think that everyone is. However you were raised, you have some sort of idea about the differences between men and women that you are taught to believe, but it is your choice whether to believe it or not.
     How did this help you to write the paper or how did not knowing the topic make it more
    difficult to write the paper? This helped me when writing the paper because I got to draw on personal experience on how the people around me growing up felt about this topic and refute some of those points to come to a conclusion that denies some harmful mistruths.
     What was your opinion / thinking on the debate before researching and writing the paper?
    How has it changed or not? My opinion before writing this paper was that men and women are equally emotional and so that was the original stance that I took. I almost came to the conclusion through my research that women are in fact more emotional than men and nearly changed my stance, but decided that we are equally emotional beings that have just been altered by the world around us.
     Does the paper inform its audience on the topic, the issue, and educate them to make an
    informed opinion? How so? The paper informs the audience well on the topic itself but could do a better job to get the audience to understand the facts and evidence to help them make an informed opinion.
     What is your overall impression of the paper? Give suggestions for improving the rough
    draft into a final draft. What needs to be done to make this a strong convincing argument? The paper is well written and interesting enough, but could include a more effective use of their sources and more pathos to add an emotional punch to an otherwise dry subject.