Outline of the critical essay 2006

Outline of the critical essay 2006 - 2 Use steps 3-6 of the...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
MODES OF REASONING OUTLINE OF THE CRITICAL ESSAY I. Introduction. 1. Topic of essay. a. Title of text you are analyzing. b. Author of text you are analyzing. 2. Summary of essay. a. What the text you are analyzing is about. b. What you’re going to say about it. II. Summary of text you are analyzing. 1. Point #1. 2. Point #2. ………… III. Critique of the text you are analyzing. 1 1. Fallacies. 2 a. Fallacy #1. i. Explanation of fallacy. ii. Show how fallacy is present in text. iii. Explain why the fallacy is a fallacy. a. Fallacy #2. ………. 2. Problems with the main concepts. 3 3. Problems of other kinds. 4 IV. Conclusion. 1. Brief summary of your points. 2. Overall evaluation of the text. 1 The types of problems below need not be covered in the order below. That is, you can talk about concepts first, then dubious premises, then fallacies, or whatever order allows you to make your points most clearly and concisely.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 2 Use steps 3-6 of the neutralizing a fallacy procedure as explain on page 48 of course kit. If you wish, you may omit step 3 (name the fallacy). Make sure you clearly indicate where in the text the fallacy is committed. Only mention fallacies that significantly weaken the argument. No nitpicking. 3 This part is only necessary if the author is making a conceptual argument, and if there are problems with his/her usage. Keep in mind that the concepts are part of the argument, so any criticisms you make about the concepts (vagueness, etc) are only relevant insofar as they weaken the argument. 4 This would include weaknesses in the argument that are not covered under the fallacies weve studied and problems stemming from failing to meet Johnsons three criteria for a good argument (acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency). For example: doubtful premises....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/07/2011 for the course MODR 1760 taught by Professor Camelacircelli during the Spring '11 term at York University.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online