Economic Inequalties

Thesis: Economic Inequalties
Submit 2-3 full annotations. Review Prompt.
Use Sample Format to create each annotation.
Each annotation should be 300 words: 3 parts; 100 words per part minimum.
Ask myself and your classmates clear and specific questions:
How can I help you continue your research?
Is there something you are stuck with?
How are your identifications of logical fallacies?
Are you able to identify 1 specific logic fallacy + 1 weak usage of rhetorical device per source?
Once you identify 1 specific logic fallacy per source, can you attempt to fix, untangle, resolve the error or reasoning; error of logic?
Context
The goal of this assignment is for you to gain a 360 view on your topic.
Essay 1 and 2 supports your thesis; whereas, Essay 3 focuses on differing point of views that disagree with your claim.
Each new source must counter, oppose, and reject your thesis for your final project’s individual topic.
Use “Sample Extended Annotated Bibliography Essay 3″ Repeat pattern 5 times for 5 new sources (counterarguments).
Do not re-use research sources from Essay 1 or 2.
You may use Pico Iyer or Alain de Botton as your counterargument.
ESSAY 3 OUTLINE (rubric, grading criteria, skills required)
The bibliographic information: Generally, though, the bibliographic information of the source (the title, author, publisher, date, etc.) is written in MLA format.
For each of your Annotated Bibliography write a minimum of 300 words.
Breakdown of each annotation: Use this exact format for each new source:
Summary of Counterargument (100 words);
Assess the Counterargument: provide a Refutation (100 words);
Reflect: provide a solution with a Concession if needed (100 words).
In other words, write 300 words (per source)
Definitions of each part of annotation:
Summary of Counterargument: Define and present the source’s objective thesis. Provide a neutral reporting of the source’s argument against yours own. What rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, logos, kairos, intertextuality) does the source use effectively to gain followers? A counterargument differs from a refutation. When a writer presents a counterargument, it acknowledges the opposing perspective’s viewpoints or evidence for taking a given position. Do not point out the counterargument’s weaknesses, blindspots, and shortcomings. A summary of counterargument must use unbiased language.
In other words,”Some annotations merely summarize the source. What are the main arguments? What is the point of this book or article? What topics are covered? If someone asked what this article/book is about, what would you say? The length of your annotations will determine how detailed your summary is” (Purdue Online Writing Lab).
Assess = Refutation: A refutation, on the other hand, disproves the opposing arguments. In other words, a refutation points out the author’s weak (ineffective) use of rhetorical appeals (telos; ethos; pathos; logos; kairos; intertextuality) and logical fallacies that an opposing argument commits, or highlights what an opposing arguments fails to address. Prove why the source is wrong: identify the source’s specific logical fallacies. How can you fix the source’s blindspots and/or oversights? What are the consequences for the demographic(s) that the counterargument fails to serve, address, and/or consider? In other words, build a refutation of its argument, exposing its incorrect assumptions, errors in logic or fact, or reasons that its argument may be biased, carefully supporting your own position with research sources with which you agree. This refutation should be relevant to the argument you are constructing so that you can use it in your final essay, but could focus on whether or not this issue is actually a problem, what the causes of the problem are, or on a different solution to the problem. Your refutation should be directed against a counterargument source.
In other words,”After summarizing a source, it may be helpful to evaluate it. Is it a useful source? How does it compare with other sources in your bibliography? Is the information reliable? Is this source biased or objective? What is the goal of this source?” (Purdue Online Writing Lab).
Reflect = Concession: Reach a (hypothetical and/or metaphorical) compromise with this counterargument. Remember, a concession is a conceding argument, yielding, or compromising in some way; albeit, grudgingly or unwillingly.
In other words,”Once you’ve summarized and assessed a source, you need to ask how it fits into your research. Was this source helpful to you? How does it help you shape your argument? How can you use this source in your research project? Has it changed how you think about your topic?” (Purdue Online Writing Lab).

Last Completed Projects