melissaargumentevaluation

melissaargumentevaluation - The argument is invalid. When...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Earlier in 2001, an earthquake in Gujarat, India, killed approximately 20,000 people. One might explain the difference in reaction by saying that we naturally respond more strongly to the deaths of Americans closer to home than to those of others halfway around the world. The premise in this argument is comparing an earthquake in India that killed 20,000, versus the deaths of 9/11. The conclusion is that Americans respond more strongly to American deaths rather than those in other countries. In this argument I do not believe that the premises is supported by the conclusion.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: The argument is invalid. When comparing these two disasters, one must remember that an earthquake is a natural disaster. The deaths of 9/11 occurred as a result of people who purposely planned to kill people and harm our country. Although the deaths in India are not less important, the deaths of 9/11 were purposely plotted, unlike the events of a natural disaster, such as an earthquake. Both points of the premise may be true in fact, however, I feel this is a weak argument....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/14/2012 for the course HCR 220 ? taught by Professor ? during the Spring '10 term at University of Phoenix.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online