Do you think Qasim made an effective argument in “Avoiding Misconceptions…”? If so, what do you think the author did particularly well? If not, what could the author have done better? Your response should be three to seven sentences long.
23 thoughts on “Blog Post #12: Thoughts on “Avoiding Misconceptions…””
Comments are closed.
Even though Qasim’s argument is structured differently than what we are doing, I think Qasim did make an effective argument. Qasim mainly structured his argument by rejecting counterarguments using evidences, which is different than what we are doing (we focus on using evidence to prove our subrgument/argument, then counterclaim). However, I was able to understand and learn from his argument. I am not really sure what he can do better. Maybe he can add couple paragraphs explaining the topic history and using subarguments rather than just rejecting counterclaims to write his argument. But personally, I don’t see the point of doing so, I really like the way he wrote/structured the argument. He also did a great job given the credits to the “original” writers by citing them in text and “Works Cited” page.
In what way do you think Qasim’s argument is structured differently?
Qasim’s argument is mainly constructed by using evidence to refuse rebuttal. I think he can use historical cases to explain his arguments and this will make people feel whether there are similar things in the past, instead of just rejecting counterclaims to write his arguments. But for me, I really like the way he wrote the argument, especially in the middle, he came to quote what Trump said during the speech and then explained what happened in this speech. He also wrote all the works he used at the end, and also gave many very good quotes in the article.
What do you mean by “refuse rebuttal”?
In the argument to “Avoiding Misconceptions: Immigrants Are Beneficial to Society.” Qasim was able to make an effective argument through reasoning and statistical evidence. In the last sentence of the first paragraph, Qasim states, “Immigrants contribute significant benefits to the economy, enhance and diversify culture, and commit even fewer crimes than U.S.-born populations.” In these three ideas, he provided an objection and rebuttal to each that ties well to the point the author is trying to make. What I found the author did particularly well on is the rebuttal for each objection. The author accepts some information of the objection that is reasonable; although, through the rebuttal, the author defends their argument on specific evidence to why the objection is false. An example of is when Qasim speaks of how illegal immigrants are given sentiment that they are drug dealers, traffickers, and gang members. On page 243, Qasim states, “While it is true that many immigrants originate from countries ridden with crime and violence, the claim that they bring the crimes with them is false.” Qasim continues with saying that since 1980, the national population of immigrants has risen by 118%; however, national crime rates have dropped 36% (Qasim). Qasim’s rebuttal that involves solid evidence and how well it ties is what I found to be done well. Through this, Qasim strengthened the argument on Avoiding Misconceptions.
Excellent work citing your source here, Daniel. I liked how you brought up specific instances from the texts to support your claims about the text.
I think Qasim did made an effective argument in “Avoiding Misconceptions…” , and while reading, I could see that every paragraph contain at least one citation, which shows me that Qasim was mainly focusing on using evidence to support his argument. And as I look in to the works cited page, I saw that there are around 12 piece of resources that Qasim used, so this was also the part where Qasim had did particularly well on it, because while using many different sources, Qasim also well analyze it and relate the evidence with his argument.
Great points, Kelly. I especially like how you noticed how there were at least one citation in each (body) paragraph.
I think Qasim made an effective argument that immigrants are beneficial to society. Qasim uses multiple sub-arguments, which immigrants contribute significant benefits to the economy, enhance and diversify culture, and commit even fewer crimes than U.S.-born populations, to support his argument. He also provides several pieces of evidence for each sub-argument. It is good that in “Avoiding Misconceptions…”, the author provides the government’s or people’s misconceptions, and uses recourse to show their views.
I agree that all of Qasim’s claims were supported by good evidence.
I think Qasim made an efficient argument stated how significant immigrants are to the United States and started of with a great hook of the country being made up of immigrants itself. He gave clear evidences of the benefits of immigrants, such as they create more jobs, many important people in history were immigrants etc. He also mentions credible sources to what might happen if the amount of immigrants decreased and its impact on society or the wealthy of the country.
I was glad to see that you provided examples of the evidence that Qasim provided.
Qasim made an effective argument that “immigrants are beneficial to society” through this Qasim brought his main question and he also made many sub-argument to support the main question. And he also explained or analyzed the reasoning for the question using the evidence which I saw in the works cited.
I would have liked to have seen a bit more of a detailed response here, Om.
I think Qasims made an effective argument in “…effective misconceptions”. I really liked the way he explained after using most of the evidence. In addition, he explained the rebuttal very well after stating the counterclaims.
This seems like a rushed response, Talha.
I think Qasim made an effective argument in “Avoiding Misconceptions Immigrants Are Beneficial to Society” that immigrants are beneficial to society.
He provided strong reasons to back up his claim. Qasim states that immigration can benefit society economically, contribute to cultural diversity, and commit fewer crimes than U.S.-born populations. Qasim supports sub-argument through the use of reasoning and statistics. An example of Qasim using statistics is he used statistical data to show when the national population of immigrants increase the crime rate decrease.
I agree that Qasim used statistics well, Sandy.
I think Qasim had made an effective argument in “Avoiding Misconceptions…” His argument mainly focuses on his claim how immigrants are beneficial to society in economy, culture, and rate of crimes. In the argument, there are citations and explanations provided for the reader to have a better understanding. He also provides the years, percentage, and “et al”, which shows the evidence he uses is reliable. I like what Qasim did in the conclusion, Qasim provides his own solution to the situation about immigrants and not just “control the border.” However, he didn’t tie back to his hook. And for the counterclaim, he didn’t provide a strong counterclaim because the 10th and 11th paragraphs are about crimes.
I’d like to know why you think “et al.” after an author’s name automatically makes the evidence credible, Lei.
The author of the reading “Avoiding Misconceptions: Immigrants Are Beneficial to Society” structured his argument differently than what we have, but I think he still made the reading effective. Qasim structured his argument on mostly providing counterarguments, he provided different sides of the argument and provide examples and evidence to prove those points of view. I think what Qasim did well is that he provided statistics in his argument and cited most of the evidence and rephrased it in his own word.
I agree that the author successfully provided both arguments and counterarguments in his piece.
I think Qasim made a good argument because he had good support for his ideas every one of his claims and statements were supported by good evidence that’s strong enough to hold him in his place of argument.