First, read four examples of argumentation essays: "The Penalty of Death" (p. 154), "Execution" (p. 156), "Fighting for Our Lives" (p.158), "Crypto-Security and a Strange Thing Called Key Recovery." (p. 164).
Next, answer two of the following questions on the blog:
1) Examine your emotional response to H. L. Mencken's
argument for capital punishment. How do
various features of his tone and language encourage you to accept or reject his
argument? What personal experiences or
beliefs make you more likely to agree or disagree with his position? Present your analysis in progress; that is,
trace your emotional reactions as you read through each section of Menken’s
essay. How did you feel when he said X?
What did you think when he said Y?
2) Analyze the types of evidence that Anna Quindlen
uses in her essay, “Execution.” Identify
what are fact, judgment, eyewitness testimony, and expert testimony. Sort out
the kinds of evidence that make it difficult for Quindlen to decide where she
stands on the issue. Then analyze which
argument – H.L., Menken’s or Quindlen’s – is more effective. Explain the reasons for your decision.
3) Evaluate Jamie Miles’s THREE drafts (found on pages
137, 147, 162). Then write him a blog to convince him which of the three drafts
he should place in his writing portfolio for final assessment. Your purpose is to convince him to submit his
“best” essay. Your problem is to determine
which of these essays has the “best” argument.
Be sure to give reasons with evidence from the best essay.
Finally, for full credit, respond to at least one other student’s blog answer.
This assignment is due by Friday, November 30, 2012 by 9 AM.
PROJECT: Read the Purdue University website on how to write a cover letter. Follow one of the samples. Remember you are applying to a college. The site is at http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/698/1. Your Cover Letter is due Monday, December 3, 2012.
#1 While reading “The Penalty of Death”, I did not feel very emotional because his tone and view seemed very point blank. He did not seem to support very much of his side with personal experience of moments to attach himself to the issue. The beginning did not show much emphasis. While approaching the second argument I sensed more power and feeling from the author. His opinion on the subject seems to get stronger throughout, increasing the readers attention near the end half of the essay.
ReplyDeleteFor the most part I agree with many of the points he had discussed. Most people including myself would agree that being an executioner would be a devastating job. But we all know many people go to horrible jobs every day. I also agree with him in the fact that putting murderers to death wont always stop the next murderer from killing someone. He mentioned that many people kill to get even, which is not always the case. I do agree with H.L. Menecken’s point that some punishment should be given otherwise the criminal wins over society. Such as Jeffrey Dahmer, if he had not been arrested who knows how many more innocent people would have died. One point that I disagree on is that people waiting on death row is cruel. H.L. Menecken says it is appropriate for murderers to be punished, but in my opinion what is punishment without
thinking about the mistakes you have made.
#3 Jaime Miles,
After reading each of your drafts, I would like to tell you my personal opinions about each. From the point of view of the reader, my thoughts are clear that the third draft (p.162) would be the most effective piece as your final assessment. I strongly believe that this piece, “Crypto-Security and a Strange Thing Called Key Recovery” would be the best of the three to submit. When compared to the others, it shows a sense of unity and detail while staying on point. The first draft lacked supporting sentences and only provided the reader with ideas of possible circumstances that could occur. The second had showed improvement by explaining key facts. However it seemed to take too long to get to the point, too much detail can ruin a great piece. The last draft questioned the audience while giving answers, bringing the readers in. Within the last essay multiple governmental authorities and businesses were names which adds to the facts. This makes the writing believable while giving it more power. Overall I would say that the coherence and material of the third draft would be the best for your submission. It shows the greatest sense of knowledge on the topic, while explaining it all to the readers.
We both had found the same things and pointed them out in our responses for number one. Although I didn't do option three, I really didn't have to because you explained it so well. So good job on that.
DeleteI also found that draft number three was the better out of the three because of the detail in it and also the the lack of details in the other drafts that in the end just leaves the reader confused.
Delete1) My personal emotional response to H.L. Mencken about his opinion of capital punishment fell into a couple different categories. One response I felt was the questioning on whether he was against or for capital punishment. I felt this because he talked about different aspects of what capital punishment can all in tale. When it came to my own personal opinion for capital punishment it is, that it works in certain circumstances. I have always thought that things should be an eye for an eye scenario. Obviously that is not the way some people see or think the world should work. Under the circumstances of murder, or sexual assault and then murder, that would be the time I think capital punishment is appropriate. When it came to his language and tone of the article I was for and against his argument. This is because I was confused when it came to making his reasonings toward the different aspects of capital punishment. When it came down to the specific points that he made, there were some that I completely agreed with. One point was the he thought that the people on death row deserve to wait for a while, whereas I believe they should be given 24-48 hours after the official ruling. In Mencken's article he talks for quite a while, about how being an executioner can be thrilling to some, for they are releasing emotional tenses, and that some people couldn't handle the job. This acquisition I can completely agree with.
ReplyDelete2) Anna Quindlen's essay "Execution," has many different aspects. She uses facts, and also her own judgements, and different testimonies. Some facts that she used would be the Ted Bundy story and the many aspects that she throws into it. One judgement that she made would be that she doesn't believe the deterrence is what proponents seek from the death penalty. She got a lot of her testimony statements from the Bundy case. The difference between a eyewitness and expert testimony is huge. An eyewitness does have facts but they are very scattered and usually misplaced. Whereas an expert testimony is true facts and usually from doctors, lawyers, or experts in the topic being questioned about. The main reason why it seemed that Quindlen had a hard time picking her side on the topic, would be all her own opinions on the topic. Most of the things she talked about came back to what she thinks should happen or what shouldn't happen. I think when it came down to it H.L. Mencken's article was the more effective of the two. This is because Mencken gave more facts and didn't base anything on his own opinion which was something Quindlen did a lot.
You explained this very well, including all key points and important cases. I also believe that H.L. Mencken's article was more effective because Quindlen didnt state as many facts and she went abck and forth with her opinion.
DeleteI got the same out of the readings and thought Mencken was more effective. I also agree with your analysis of Mencken.
Deletei agree with number 2 because this is close to what i kind of put. About the eyewitness and her making a lot of opinions and not facts.
DeleteI read this essay too. I like how she backed up what she had to say with the Ted Bundy story. She thought about the situation if she was in it. It kind of makes me think about if I were there too.
Delete2) While reading this article, Anna used facts and testimonies but to me mainly seemed all opinion. She talked about how much she disliked the death penalty. She said by doing it, we move down to the level of the killers. The death penalty is said to have made no sense. H.L Mecken's article seemed more factual and because it was more factual made it more effective. You cannot base things on opinion, sure everyone has opinions but you need facts. To make a good argument, you have to have true facts, and lots of them. Anna Quindlen did not have many facts.
ReplyDelete3) When reading H.L Mencken's argument, the emotion I felt was like I knew exactly what he was talking about. When he said," The thing they crave primarily is the satisfaction of seeing the criminal actually before them suffer as he made them suffer." H.L's argument was factual but at the same time opinion based. I sort of agree, he says that torture is wrong and thinks even a murderer deserves an easy way out. I don't think that torture is a good/fair thing but I also don't think anyone deserves to die. I think if the murderer wanted himself to die, he could tell the judge, if he wanted to rot in a jail cell until he died then he could do that too. The choice of a life should not lie in the hands of another, no matter the stakes.
1) Anna Quindlen's essay identify what are fact, judgment, eyewitness testimony, and expert testimony. A judgment she made was she doesn't believe the deterrence is what proponents seek from the death penalty. She is basically a eyewitness just cause an eyewitness does have facts but they are very scattered and usually misplaced. I think why she had an hard time picking her side on the topic was because she was saying what they should and shouldn't do. Giving out her opinions, but not really knowing which to choice out of those. My opinion on which one was more effective would have to be H. L. Mencken's,just because he had gave lots of facts and not opinions. So that is what Quindlen did not do. Only opinions is what she mostly gave.
ReplyDelete2)While i was reading H.L. Mencken's argument there was a certain emotion i felt which was the word katharsis when he says "a school boy disliking his teacher, deposits a tack upon the pedagocical chair; the teacher jumps and the boy laughs". Mencken says torture is wrong and even a murderer deserves an easy way out. Torture is not a good thing because no should ever deserve to die by torture to tell you the truth. If you're going to torture someone you should be ready to die yourself or be ready to get punished in some type of way. No one should be able to kill another person. You should be able to live your life until your time is up. If god wants you to die then your time will come only when GOD wants you to. It's just that simple.
#1) I read the "Penalty of Death". At first, I wasn't really interested in what he was saying. Unlike the essay "Execution", he did not start it off strong with facts to support what he was saying. You can see in his second argument, that not only he writes more about it, but he gets more into it. I really liked his points and the things he touched. He says simply, alarm B will not kill alarm C. I agree when be say they have to wait months to face the rope or the chair. I seen a show once where inmates went crazy and had to always be on lockdown because they literally drove themselves crazy waiting for their execution. I agree with him when he says it is horribly cruel, because it is. They should just get it over with. His tone makes me more interested in it because you can feel how strongly he feels about it. This made me see a different side of execution and the reasons behind killing. He says some people do it to get even. I think in the past that was the case, but now people do it for nothing. That made me a bit sad.
ReplyDelete#2) Anna Quildlens essay has different points everywhere. Many times through out it, she puts herself in the situation. A lot of her evidences comes from the Ted Bundy case. Whenever she was close to getting to the point, she would bring up her own opinion. Facts are the truth placed into sentences. Judgement is just going off what you think it correct. Eyewitness testimonies are usually people who saw it occur and live to tell officials what happened. Expert testimonies are the flat out truth. Professionals do research and have evidence to show it. I think that this author talked a lot and that pulled her away from reaching the facts. She always had to put in her two cents. She often tried to imagine herself there.
I also agree with you on how he feels about people having to wait for their execution. It is just cruel. Why make people wait for something like that.
Delete1. When it comes to reading the article on the death penalty I feel that the author was not fully there in all his points. At first he really did not seem to be putting all his heart into his explanation and reasoning. This made it hard to keep reading because you think if someone is really into something and believes what they believe then they should have no problem demonstrating it. But once I kept reading his voice and feeling began to come out. The one line that he said that really said something to me was at the end of the 6 paragraph when he said ''it is more effectively and economically achieved, as human nature now is, by wafting the criminal to realms of bliss.''
ReplyDelete3. Jamie Milies I think did a good job on all of her 3 drafts. Not one was poorly evaluated or written I thought. If I had to pick only one for her to place in her assignment portfolio I would pick draft number 3. Crypto-Security and a Strange Thing Called Key Recovery” would be best to use out of all 3. In this draft she staying on the point through out the whole paper, while including detail and good important factors. The first draft seemed to be missing to much and left me confused. The second draft was better then the first but still did not complete all the key factors needed like in the third one.
1) When reading The Penalty of Death by H.L. Mecken the beginning was boring and did not have a lot of information involved in it. It made me bored to read and didn’t show any expression. During the second argument he started to show more emotion and had way more points of view. I believe that he is right when he talks about how the inmates went crazy. Waiting for their execution was just cruel; if they are going to do it why not just get it over with. You can tell towards the middle and end of the essay that he had a strong point of view and feeling about. I don’t think this should have ever existed.
ReplyDelete3) After reading all three of your essays I have concluded that you should use draft three “Crypto-Security and a Strange Thing Called Key Recovery” as your final assessment. I believe this because it had strong detail and got straight to the point and did not get off topic. The first and second one was also good but was lacking certain things. For example the first one lack sentences that backed up you opinions. The second one would be my second choice if I had to because it had way to much detail that was not as important; it did not get to the point and was to long.
i agreeon the first one that they didnt have alot a detail inthe beginnig but then once you read more if had more detail and more information
DeleteIn H. L. menckens I think that every person that does a crime should pay in some way what they did. The reason why I say that because if some kills someone it doesn’t only effect the person that is being kills but also the close friends and family that they have. And what ever they did to that person it should be done to them so they can know and feel how they person they killed felt. In most cases now a day’s they only either never find the killer or they put them to jail for a few years and they are back on the street. I know that if I knew someone that got killed by some person ill make sure that they are found and punished right. And also they mention god and what they said it true, we humans don’t forgive most of the time but god forgive everyone of us for the crime people do.
ReplyDeleteIn exection there was a 6year old boy that was taken from his parents and killed. And I think that the guy that did that should be punished because he didn’t give that boy a chance to live and live life.
This blog assignment is now complete and closed. No late comment assignments will be accepted for this specific blog. See Mr. Dawursk for further information.
ReplyDelete