English 320, web-based Class

Lesson for Week 11: Day 1

11.1

Your assingment for today was to . . .

Write an outline based on one of the three patterns discussed last timeand send it to me and to continue research.

Today we focus on describing both sides of the argument

In 10.1 we explored the topic of debating public issues, but we did it very generally, as an overview. We now come back to some of these concepts so that we can put them to work for us. One of the first things you need to do in order to write an effective paper is to understand both sides of the argument as thoroughly as possible. Another way to say this is to say that we need to describe the dissoi logoi, or competing words, in the case.

You have now narrowed your topic to a specific issue, and you have been reading arguments on both sides. You should be able to step back now and look at the whole population of texts. Your annotated bibliography should help you remember the gist of the various things you have been reading (you should continue to build the bibliography as your reading expands).

Go back over the things you have been reading and start summarizing the major arguments that have been made in each piece. You should be able to create a list something like the following:

Genetically modified wheat should be approved for general planting because . .

  1. reason one (name of person who makes this argument)
  2. reason two (name of person who makes this argument)
  3. reason three (name of person who makes this argument)
  4. reason four (name of person who makes this argument)
  5. reason five (name of person who makes this argument)
Genetically modified wheat should not be approved for general planting because . . .
  1. reason one (name of person who makes this argument)
  2. reason two (name of person who makes this argument)
  3. reason three (name of person who makes this argument)
  4. reason four (name of person who makes this argument)
  5. reason five (name of person who makes this argument)

If you have printed these documents, you should use highlighters to mark places where these various arguments are made so that you can find them later for inclusion in the final paper. As you work with these two lists, you should try to set them side by side, something like the following:

Genetically modified wheat should be approved for general planting because . .

  1. reason one (name of person who makes this argument)
  2. reason two (name of person who makes this argument)
  3. reason three (name of person who makes this argument)
  4. reason four (name of person who makes this argument)
  5. reason five (name of person who makes this argument)
 Genetically modified wheat should not be approved for general planting because . . .
  1. reason one (name of person who makes this argument)
  2. reason two (name of person who makes this argument)
  3. reason three (name of person who makes this argument)
  4. reason four (name of person who makes this argument)
  5. reason five (name of person who makes this argument)
If you can line these arguments up so that the arguments that address each other are right across from each other, you will have a better idea of how the two sides are addressing the issue, but that's a topic for next time.

Assignment

Take a look at the policitical overtones that may come from the GMO controversy and the world of art in this article on an art professor's arrest from the Chronicle of Higher Education. Here's anothe article from the Chronicle about a professor who didn't get tenure, perhaps because of his criticism of the University's GMO connections. Here's another website put up by activists who are trying to make Europe a GMO free zone.

Make an entry in the blog.

Continue research and create a list that shows the arguments being made by both sides (like the one described above). Hold on to it because next lesson asks you to perform a more specific analysis (based on stasis) of the two sides of the argument. There will be an assignment to send in then.

Next