One you have selected your piece, then you will begin your written refutation for two of the author’s claims. One of your claims can be the proposition—the main claim—but it doesn’t have to be.
For each claim, first identify specifically the claim that you are refuting. Then, using course concepts we have learned, identify the reasons why you believe the argument in support of the claim is flawed. Be specific and thorough. Try to find more than one reason, or if you only identify one reason, explain in more detail.
DEFENSE (Reasoning):
The argument relies on faulty reasoning by violating some important reasoning principle we have discussed. (See the Course Materials on Reasoning, Fallacies, and the Toulmin Model.) Some examples include:
The warrant, or logical connection, between the grounds and the claim is missing.
The argument relies on reasoning by example, but the examples used are not enough to draw a conclusion, are not representative of most examples, or are outweighed by counterexamples.
The argument relies on poor reasoning because the reasoning represents a fallacy.
DEFENSE (Evidence):
The argument relies on evidence that is not credible. (See the Course Materials on Evidence.) Some examples include:
The authority lacks credibility because the subject matter is highly technical, and the authority does not have any experience or expertise with that subject matter.
The authority has questionable credibility because they are being paid to take the position they take.
The evidence is simply too old to be relevant to the current situation it has been applied to.
OFFENSE:
The policy at issue would make the problem the author seeks to solve worse or would cause other disadvantages that outweigh the advantages.
Sample of writing in the file provided.
( make sure this is look the same format as sample provide)
( Important : Make sure you include eall of the criteria on this assignment Refutation Assignment Rubric below)
Refutation Assignment Rubric
Criteria
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentifies Source (Article, Author, Date, Publication/Site)
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentifies Proposition
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRefutes First Claim
Thoroughly identifies argument flaws using course concepts:
— Defense (reasoning); or
— Defense (evidence); or
— Offense
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRefutes Second Claim
Thoroughly identifies argument flaws using course concepts:
— Defense (reasoning); or
— Defense (evidence); or
— Offense
