Article Questions 9/3/18

Nicholas Kristof, “Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?”

  1. What seems to be the overall argument? The overall argument seems to be why our government cannot seem to do something about gun control in our country.
  2. What are some of Kristof’s main claims? Some of Kristof’s main claims are limiting gun purchases to no more than once a month and enforcing universal background checks for those who want to purchase a gun.
  3. What kinds of claim does he present (see reader pages 15-16) Kristof uses many comparison claims. For example he compared school shooting deaths to ladder deaths because he was trying to prove a point about regulating guns. He also uses claims about facts and existence. He used a statistic that showed that around 10,000 lives would be saved if we did something to regulate gun use.
  4. List some of the main types of evidence presented (see reader 17 – 21) and discuss how persuasive they are. Some of the main types of evidence that Kristof uses is statistical data, quotations, and facts. Statistical data and facts are extremely persuasive because when the readers is reading that information for the first time they can be surprised and shocked leading them to research more about the cause and then follow through with doing something about it. Quotations are important and helpful because it is coming from a reliable source that people know and want to believe.
  5. Identify two strategies Kristof uses to persuade his audience. Two strategies that Kristof uses to persuade his audience are using authorities or “big names”, and he appeals to the readers emotions by using pathos. For example he mentions a quote by President Barack Obama to try and build the readers trust. He uses pathos by relating to parents that have kids by talking about children dying by massacre.
  6. What is your response to the text (general thoughts or discussion of how effective you think it was). I think that this text provided really good evidence to support the overall argument. I do think that their should’ve been more elaboration on the main claims that were made because they were only talked about for a short amount of time compared to the entire writing. Overall Kristof did a good job persuading readers to take action instead of reading it and doing nothing.

 

Nicholas Kristof, “Some Inconvenient Gun Facts for Liberals”

  1. What seems to be the overall argument? The overall argument of this article would be to teach the community about gun safety and what has been attempted at making the laws more safe but were ineffective.
  2. What are some of Kristof’s main claims? Some main claims that Kristof has made in this article would be when he says that in the past we have tried to ban assault weapons but the statistics show that the deaths after that movement did not reduce at all. Another claim he made was that universal background checks should be required for all who are purchasing a gun.
  3. What kinds of claim does he present (see reader pages 15-16) Kristof used a comparison claim very nicely in his text. He compared the deaths of people by guns to the deaths of people in the American Revolution. He also uses a call to action at the very end paragraph stating that we need to do something about this problem.
  4. List some of the main types of evidence presented (see reader 17 – 21) and discuss how persuasive they are. Some evidence that I saw in this article were facts and data. The use of facts and data is extremely important when trying to persuade someone because it is giving them valuable information that the reader has probably never heard before and is shocking and new to them. Another type of evidence that was used was statistical data and polls. These are also helpful because the readers see that real people voted on the same surveys and they can relate to them.
  5. Identify two strategies Kristof uses to persuade his audience. One strategy that I saw Kristof use in this piece was a rhetorical question. These are effective because it gets the reader thinking. Another strategy I found in this article was the use of authorities and big names. By referencing Obama it makes the readers think about how he is a credible source of information and are more likely to believe it.
  6. What is your response to the text (general thoughts or discussion of how effective you think it was). Personally I did not think this article was persuasive or effective. There was no call to action and it was mostly facts that most people would probably skip over and think were boring. This article needs work on the strategy side of its writing.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s