Considering Types

Land Rover Our Planet "Land Rover in action in the Altai Mountains" June 10, 2011 via Flickr
reuse with attribution, no-derivs

In this blog post, I am evaluating different types of arguments for possible use in my paper.

Position
I think a position argument seems on the surface to suite my paper very well. This argument type would allow me to defend my ideas based on their merits as well as explain why the current system has problems.

Causal
More interesting, I think, would be a causal argument. This type of argument argues for why a certain thing caused something else. I think it could be compelling to try to combine this sort of argument with a position argument to explain how unrealistic and arbitrary legislation caused VW to illegally cheat on it's emissions tests.

Evaluative
As part of an explanation of how the current emissions testing system fails, I could also easily include evaluative aspects in my argument. This would most likely come about by looking at current policies which would be causal and then constructing an evaluative argument about how they are failures.

Proposal
Regardless of what I do with the rest of my argument, there will certainly be proposal characteristics to it. A large part of my paper will revolve around what the current problem is and how we can fix it.

Refutation
I don't think a large part of my argument will be a refutation as there are not really directly clashing viewpoints about the VW scandal.

------

I commented on Swati's Rhetorical Action Plan as well as her Considering Types post. I also commented on Evan's Rhetorical Action Plan and his Considering Types post. I think this was a very valuable exercise over all. It was very interesting to see what types of argument my classmates deemed best in a variety of situation and it was somewhat relieving that I happened to agree with all of them.