Argument Evaluation - The article has two different...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
The article has two different paragraphs that have arguments. The first paragraph I believe is an argument that provides a premise and conclusion. The premise of the paragraph is “The terrorist attack of the 9/11 produced a response among Americans officials, the media, and the public… the very nature of terrorism to strike fear in the hearts of the population under attack.” I think the conclusion of the argument is “one might say the terrorists were successful, not just as a result of their own efforts but also of the American Reaction…to that extent Americans unwittingly cooperated with the terrorists in achieving a major goal: spreading fear and disrupting lives.” Do the premises sufficiently support the conclusions? I think that the reaction of the Americans at the time of the 9/11 attacks were justified, I really do think that the conclusion does support the premise. As it describes later in the article the attention the terrorist received was of the life loss tragedies to put fear into the American people. Are the arguments either deductively valid or inductively strong or they invalid or weak?
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 10/24/2010 for the course CRT/205 CRT/205 taught by Professor Mattocks during the Winter '10 term at University of Phoenix.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online