Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Blog #3: The importance of "THE WARRANT"
The warrant of an argument is one of the most critical pieces to the said argument. When someone presents an argument one of the most crucial elements is what the reader, or audience, will already believe due to their personal morals and their upbringing. The author is writing an argument with his or her own personal beliefs and ideas about the issue being presented that he or she feels and wants the readers to share. Most of these beliefs held by the author are not expressively written by the author; rather the ideas are hinted at, or implied by the claim and then the corresponding support. These ideas and opinions already formulated by the reader through previously read information and possible societal norms have the most influence on how the particular reader will interpret an argument. An example of a warrant is, when an author states that a quarterback of a football team is overrated because his team can’t win he implies that a quarterback is the main reason for a teams success. The best chance an author has of convincing their readers of their argument is if they share warrants. However, when a reader doesn’t share the same warrant as the author, the argument loses articulacy. For instance, if someone is trying to argue the idea that universal healthcare is needed in the United States to a person who already feels that the government has too much involvement in our society; their warrant that everyone deserves health care is lost. Another example is if a person is trying to argue that the war in Iraq is unjustified and a lost cause to a person who is a loyal Bushy (a person who is a fan of George W. Bush) and believes in imposing democracy on a country, this argument again would have little foundation. Therefore, the warrant is more than likely the most pivotal component to any strong and convincing argument.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Help Create Democracy 2.0
Week Released: September 17-21, 2007
The Millennial Generation, including myself, is interested in being an
active part of changing public policy. This interest led me to be a part of
Mobilize.org¹s Democracy 2.0 Campaign.
On July 4, Mobilize.org began the Democracy 2.0 project to call attention to
the ways that our democratic process and institutions are properly serving
and failing to serve the interests of Americans, specifically young
Americans. The purpose of Democracy 2.0 is to call attention to the main
problems of our current political system, highlight the distinct
characteristics of the Millennial Generation, and provide guidelines for
change to help cultivate a renewed political process in America.
Currently, our political system is trying to manage a 21st century society
with 18th century political institutions. Democracy 2.0 will upgrade our
current political system, empowering citizens to identify community
problems, propose solutions, be a part of the implementation of these
solutions, and change the way politics is done in this country.
To begin this endeavor, Mobilize.org asked a series of questions and
collected data from youth, ages 16-30 that will be reviewed and evaluated by
Democracy 2.0 Ambassadors at the Democracy 2.0 Summit on October 3, 2007,
with the intention of releasing the Democracy 2.0 Declaration of Our
Generation. The Declaration of our Generation is a short statement of
principles describing a citizen-centered approach to democracy. The
Declaration will focus on three themes: 1) What currently works and what
does not work in our democracy; 2) What defines our generation; and 3) What
Democracy 2.0 should look like.
The Declaration will call attention to areas in which the government is
succeeding and failing to serve the public interest, highlight the unique
and defining characteristics of our generation, and provide guidelines that
will serve as a call to action for American citizens to help create this
renewed form of democracy.
I wanted to mention this opportunity since every posting here has an
interest in this. Mobilize.org is looking for people who want to serve as
Democracy 2.0 Online Ambassadors to be a part of the drafting process. If
you have any questions, please shoot me an e-mail at brendan.chan@mail.utexas.edu.
Is it a warrant to have the belief that the President has complete control of the military? I wonder what the difference is between a warrant and misinformation. Do you know?
Post a Comment