Argument Evaluation 1

Argument Evaluation 1 - consequences. Today with the way...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
In the 9/11 essay I do not feel as if the premises sufficiently support the conclusion and it was more a drift away from the main idea of the essay. The narrator started out talking about the 9/11 issues but started talking about the way to get the to become terrorist a more rational person then taking lives of innocent people. The Arguments in a way are deductively valid because, we might have accomplished something if we did in fact treat 9/11 with a serious tone of threat rather then playing it off like it wasn’t going to happen. Recapping on what was said it was said to be true that the secretary of defense knew of the 9/11 attack was going to take place but decided to do nothing about it and the Americans had to suffer the
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: consequences. Today with the way the government and politics are it is in a way to prove that it is plausibly true. The government has so many co-ops that are being conducted and the Americans will never know about it until a terrible catastrophe happens. The premises are true because it is a terrifying event that happened. But in the same since I feel as if someone else beside the terrorist shouldve been held responsible for the 9/11 attack. Like someone in the nations capitol. Moreover I would like to think that our nations capitol upholds the same laws as we as Americans do but I do not feel that way for several things have taken place over the years....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 07/06/2011 for the course ECON 105 taught by Professor Tomlin during the Spring '11 term at University of Phoenix.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online