Post a link to a webpage that you think contain a good example of an argument about one of the following types of proposition: fact, value, policy, definition, or interpretation. Include a brief explanation of how you see the example working and of where it occurs on the page. Complete this by the night before class.
22 thoughts on “Examples of Key Propositions”
Comments are closed.
Donald Trump’s tax plan that was released this week creates a situation that is a propositional fact. Specifically, he makes an argument with proposition of occurrence. At a recent news conference, Donald Trump claimed his tax plan would pay for itself with economic growth. Trump claims the economy could expand as much as 6 percent a year. The author of the article, Josh Barro, is skeptical that the economy will grow at a 6 percent rate. Barro then links an earlier article he wrote on Jeb Bush’s plan for 4 percent annual growth for the United States economy.
Economists have a good overall sense of how much the economy will grow over the next year or two down the road. However, no economic model or forecast is for certain because it is just that, a forecast. Trump and Jeb Bush use the argument of occurrence in this situation in that they predict their presidencies will bring about 4 and 6 percent economic growth, respectively. Although columnists such as Josh Barro are skeptical, it is impossible to discount their claims because it is a future event that we don’t know will or will not happen. The use of proposition of occurrence, a type of propositional fact, is a powerful tool for politicians to create greater popularity in their policy proposals.
Referrence:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/upshot/trump-plan-is-tax-cut-for-the-rich-even-hedge-fund-managers.html?rref=upshot
I read the article on Donald Trump’s tax cut plan. I found it difficult to read because I don’t understand tax laws and loopholes. Josh Barro highlights the contradictions in the proposals that most lay people, like me, would not understand unless they knew the laxation rates of corporate America. I think that deception is part of all propositions during the campaigns of my congressmen. It is all about highlighting the bottom line when the facts actually do not make sense. The act of charging tax breaks on areas of corporate America and small business owners when there are existing laws that allow them options for adverting his proposed interventions is fruitless to say the least. I believe the motivation of the tax proposal was just to counter Jeb Bush with a higher percentage of “trumped” up fictious savings that will never happened unless the whole system is restructured. No pun intended. Mr. Trump is betting that the majority of the American people do no understand what he is saying and he is right. The six percent is all that matters. The actual plan doesn’t need to make sense for his purposes.
The issue of marriage equality is one that has been of great debate over the past decade and has been seen increasingly in the media over the past few years as new legislation arises. At the core of the issue, however, is the definition of marriage and a changing wave of what it means to be married in today’s culture and society. Taking a look at two different websites, Human Rights Campaign (hrc.org) and nationformarriage.org, we can see that the definition of marriage is greatly debated by the two conflicting opinions on how and why marriage should be defined. I believe that each of these websites seeks to provide a proposition of definition in favor of their views. Although each organization believes they have the most fitting, correct or useful definition, it has been up to the supreme court to make a proposition for interpretation. Examples of each organization’s proposition of definition can been seen; within HRC’s website, marriage can be defined through the marriage link under topics. Equally, The Nation for Marriage states it’s believed definition of marriage within MADA under our work. Below, I have included links to each organization’s website along with an interesting article from NPR that talks about how we as a society have attempted and failed to textual define marriage as it’s meaning has changed.
http://www.hrc.org/
https://www.nationformarriage.org/
http://www.npr.org/2013/04/04/176235479/even-dictionaries-grapple-with-getting-marriage-right
A good example of a proposition of interpretation comes from the “About the Tenth Amendment” page of the Tenth Amendment Center’s website (link can be found below). In discussing this particular amendment to the United States Constitution, the author here clearly puts forth what the Center believes is its meaning, stating that it was written ” to emphasize the limited nature of the powers delegated to the federal government,” allowing it only to exercise a specifically laid-out set of powers while “the states and the people, with some small exceptions, were free to continue exercising their sovereign powers.”
The proposition of interpretation here is augmented by a short mention of the intentions behind the amendment. The author talks about the deep distrust for governmental power among the Founding Fathers generally, and the fears by some of them (specifically the Anti-Federalists) that the Constitution, as originally drafted in 1787, gave too much power to the Federal Government. It was ultimately due to their persistence on the matter, intellectual sway, and help from allies, the piece notes, that the Tenth Amendment was added to the Constitution.
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/about/about-the-tenth-amendment/
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/we-have-moral-obligation-take-syrian-refugees
There is much debate about what to do with the Syrian refugees. Some countries such as Germany and the Scandinavian nations have decided to accept hundreds of thousands of refugees, while other nations, including our own are accepting far fewer. In his article “We have a moral obligation to take in Syrian refugees”, Marion T. Garcia makes a value proposition that we should take in more refugees. He makes a deductive argument, with a premise that we have a moral responsibility to help families and children based on Christian and Jewish moral traditions, since refugees are families and children that need help, we should help them. Garcia also uses an analogy of U.S. policy during the Central American refugee crisis to show how the U.S. was morally wrong then. He then concludes that we should not make the same mistake as before, and therefore we should take more refugees.
“The United States must join the rest of the industrialized world and recognize that health care is a right of all, and not a privilege.”
This is written on Senator Sanders website as point no. 10 in his 12 Steps Forward as a proposition of policy regarding health care. The website outlines what he believes are key policy initiatives that will help the US move “forward.” Its a strong statement because it alludes to a position assumed by other industrialized countries and leaves the US as the current outlier. In some ways, it can also be read as a policy on values as its saying that health care should be readily accessible to all (a right) as opposed to a few (a privilege). The right vs. privilege argument has certain value implications related to those of liberty and equality from the readings. Can we impede ambitious Americans from profiting from the health care system by establishing a Medicare-for-all, single-payer system? Or do we preserve the liberty of those who own insurance companies and their ability to operate in a free market? Sanders value/policy agenda would argue that the equal access path would be more beneficial for US progress.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/agenda/
The following examples, found below, are two site where the definition of the word family is defined by different people based on their personal experiences. In the New York Times Learning Network blog post, the author presents her own definition of what she defines as a “normal” family. She notes that a family is traditionally defined as “a married mother and father and their biological children living together under one roof?” However, she challenges this definition and encourages students to post their views and create their own descriptions of family. She acknowledges the fact that our definitions of the word have evolved as society’s views have changed. In the post, one student states that “family to refers to an individual that you can share your good times and bad times with them, and they will Love you in spite of it all. It is no longer about blood relations or heritage, it’s about the connection between the two that makes them ‘family.’”
The student’s perspective on family is consistent with the descriptions of other students on the post, as well as the multiple definitions I found on the Lovetoknow.com website. Here the author identifies and defines different types of families found in today’s society, such as traditional, foster, extended and step families. When I think of my personal definition of the word family, I realize that it has greatly evolved as I have become an adult. Family is a word that seemed simple as child, but I now have some many different definitions of whom I consider my family (for different reasons). Hence why, I think this is an example of how we can each define a term differently based on personal experiences and continue to deliberate on the meaning from one person to the next.
http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/how-do-you-define-family/?_r=0
http://family.lovetoknow.com/definition-family
A value proposition that came up when the pope visited is that of the death penalty. The pope advocated for the poor and underrepresented in his wish to abolish the death penalty stating, “I am convinced that this way is the best, since every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes.” It follows deductive reasoning that since every life is sacred, no ones life should be taken from them, including convicted felons.
However, value propositions have been made supporting the death penalty as well. Senator Ted Cruz stated, “I believe the death penalty is a recognition of the preciousness of human life, that for the most egregious crimes, the ultimate punishment should apply.” In this argument, the penalty should match the crime, so to give someone less than the death penalty would fail to recognize the value of the life that was lost.
This points out how tricky value propositions are – it is easy to understand where each side is coming from and it is hard to find a 100% right answer when it comes to ethical issues. In fact, my argument against the death penalty does not even touch on these basic issues of value. I look at the system itself and at how many executions have been botched and also how many innocent people have been sentenced to death. Whether death should be the penalty or not, should we continue to implement a system with so much room for error and with such high stakes?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/09/24/pope-francis-tells-congress-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/
A controversial issue in todays’ society is whether or not collegiate athletes should be paid. The article I chose to write uses a proposition of interpretation. This is evident when a federal judge states “The NCAA is not above antitrust rules” but still ruled against paying each collegiate athlete 5 thousand dollars. This is a proposition of interpretation because the courts believe that amateur and academic institutions should not follow antitrust laws to the full extent.
Clearly, the NCAA operates as a full fledge businesses, generating millions of dollars in ticket sales, broadcasts, apparel and videogames. The interpretation of the antitrust law is the sole reason why NCAA athletes have been cheated out of any compensation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/01/sports/obannon-ncaa-case-court-of-appeals-ruling.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Xi on the global stage: The costs of leadership by Bruce Jones
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/order-from-chaos/posts/2015/09/24-xi-jinping-costs-of-leadership-jones
I’m using the same article as the one for the types of arguments to discuss the key propositions. As I have already mentioned in the last post, President Xi claims that “China is committed to a peaceful rise.” Bruce Jones argues about the proposition of fact in this case. In the standpoint of Jones, President Xi must have established two facts before making such a proposition solid and convincing. The first one is that China must assume a great share of the costs of collective action in the international level. The second one is that China must follow essential principles of the international order, such as “the prohibition against the acquisition of territory by force and the assertion of non-interference in sovereign affairs.”
In arguing the proposition of the first fact, Jones gives out a positive answer by providing sufficient evidence. In the new century, China has been bearing the cost of leadership in a variety of international affair, for example, SARS, Ebola, and counter-ISIS campaign. All these evidence support the rise of China on the global stage.
However, Jones argues that China cannot claim its rise is peaceful because of its “assertive-tilting-to-aggressive strategy” in the South China Sea. President Xi may respond that such a strategy is necessary to address the current tensions for the peace in the future. Therefore, the definition of “peaceful rise” is arguable in this example. Similar cases also mentioned in this article are the U.S. and Russia, as they also violate the essential principles in Iraq and Crimea.
The website UFO evidence basically lists down the evidences and proofs establishing the existence of UFOs. This website makes a fact based proposition that the governent covers up any evidence related to UFOs. The facts in this proposition are expressed through examples of documents and papers written by PhDs in the field who agree with the content that the website is posting. These kind of sources just make the claim more credible and makes it easier for people believe it (UFO Evidence, 2015).
Link – UFO Evidence. (2015). Government Cover-Up. Retrieved September 30th, 2015, from ufoevidence.org: http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/government.htm
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/uber-is-serving-new-yorks-outer-boroughs-more-than-taxis-are/
The Uber service falls under the fact, policy and value proposition. It is a policy debate because NYC has a strong taxi union (TLC) that serves the residents of this city and provides a livelihoods for numerous people. They also have to pass inspections and abide by city laws when transporting passengers. However, the article states a fact that Uber is serving a large numbers of New Yorkers, 93 million to be exact. Therefore, the city has to consider regulating Uber services and has to consider the livelihood of taxi drivers who now face strong competition from Uber drivers.
It is also a value proposition because as the article points out, it provides added value to city residents who need to commute to outer boroughs or during rush hour and are unable to find taxis.
This proposition is a stock issue of debates and one that has arguments on both sides.
“If we want something better — multisectarian democracy in Syria soon — we would have to go in and build it ourselves. The notion that it would only take arming more Syrian moderates is insane.”
Thomas Friedman’s recent article on the Syrian crisis an exemplar of a proposition of foreign policy. He argues that Obama’s diplomatic efforts in Syria are not enough to achieve the reform he aims to achieve; according to Friedman, in order to achieve a democracy, U.S. forces must get involved, especially as Russia gains more control in the region.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/opinion/thomas-friedman-syria-obama-and-putin.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/01/worlds-energy-systems-at-risk-from-global-warming-say-leading-firms
This article uses a proposition of fact right in the first sentence: “The world’s energy infrastructure is at risk from extreme weather expected to result from climate change, a group of prominent energy companies has warned.” Scientists have studied climate change’s effects on the world thus far and have predicted how it will impact the future. These studies prove that more and more extreme weather conditions have been occurring as a result of global warming, and so it is reasonable to believe that the world’s infrastructure is at risk. The article provides plenty of examples of climate change having this effect, and if the reader went out and did their own research on the subject they would very likely reach the same conclusion as the article.
The article below is titled “Are You Really A Coach?” and goes into the varying definitions of a coach nowadays. For example, there are “business coaches, life coaches, spiritual coaches, financial coaches, and the list goes on and on.” The article is an example of a proposition of definition, which concerns claims about the meaning of key terms. In the article, the author explains that there is a problem with all of the ways we use the term “coach” today and states that many people who call themselves coaches are in fact not coaches. The author then selects a specific definition from the international coach federation as his chosen definition and suggests other terms for people who might think they are coaches but do not in fact fall within the definition as she sees appropriate.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/victoria-a-tiller/are-you-really-a-coach_b_8201838.html?utm_hp_ref=business&ir=Business
An article on the Huffington Post discussed the value of education and propositioned that having a college degree will eventually lead a individual to be financially better off than those who dies not have one. The article begin by stating that, “ There is no greater financial investment in one’s future than a college degree.” The article also reported that,” According to new data, based on an analysis of Labor department statistics by the Economic Policy Institute, Americans with four-year college degrees are not only equipped for a fulfilling adult and professional life but made 98 percent more an hour on average than those without a degree.” From this, it is clearly that the value of education will lead a better economic outcome for an individual.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-j-lowe/education-is-worth-the-in_b_5767518.html
does *
As many people know Donald Trump has released his tax plan and economists on both sides of the political isle are ripping it to shreds. The left leaning Center for Tax Justice are saying that the plan would put the United States in $9 billion more in debt in 10 years and the right leaning Tax Foundation has their figures up to the $10 Billion range. All the while Trump is parading his plan around saying that his plan will grow the economy so much that it will exponentially reduce our deficit and be able to pay for things like a wall border with Mexico and a greater military.
This article is a good example of a Proposition of Policy because the article shows how the political right, left and what ever you want to call Donald Trump all claim to know the correct course of action yet share very different ways to go about achieving it.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/29/politics/donald-trump-tax-cost/
http://www.sharksavers.org/en/education/the-value-of-sharks/sharks-role-in-the-ocean/
Every page of this website, and even just the fact that it exists, are examples of a proposition of value. The WildAid/Shark Saver organization has deemed the cause of shark population preservation a worthy enough cause to dedicate their time to spreading awareness about shark endangerment through the creation and maintenance of this website. The website even has a page that is titled “The Value of Sharks” which explains the role sharks play in marine ecosystems, why their continued presence in the ocean is important to the environment as a whole, and it even provides an extensive list of credible sources for the information provided. The argument that humans need to take action in order to protect shark populations is controversial and not a stance that is shared by all people, but the WildAid organization’s high-quality, user-friendly, and well-cited webpage is a key aspect in this example of a proposition of value that serves to uphold the organization’s claims of the importance of sharks.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/world/middleeast/russia-syria-airstrikes-isis.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
There is tremendous disagreement between the US and Russia over how best to confront both ISIS and the larger Syrian Civil War. This disagreement has recently centered on Pres. Putin and Pres. Obama’s differing definitions of the terms “terrorist” and “rebel”. For the United States and most of its allies, ISIS has been defined as an evil terrorist organization. Al-Nusrah is considered a terrorist organization, but one which is in league with US-backed rebels, so they get a pass for the time being. Syrian Pres. Assad is defined by the US as a tyrannical dictator who’s lost his legitimacy; a sort of terrorist in his own right.
Putin meanwhile, has drawn much starker lines in the sand. For him, Assad is the legal leader of Syria while all other combatants are simply terrorists. He recognizes no rebels, and does not distinguish between the many different groups and their ideologies. Anyone who takes up arms against the Syrian Army is simply a terrorist. Armed with these definitions, Russia has now undertaken two straight days (with many more to come) of airstrikes against fighters threatening Assad’s coastal stronghold. Those targeted thus far are the core of what the US considers rebels, causing much consternation between the two nations.
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-overview/
this website talks about facts and figures about the global warming. In my opinion, the conclusion is proposition of facts. By definition this kind of proposition are claims about existence, occurrence, quantity and cause. And these claims are evident by observation of the world. As the opening line “Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are drying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace ” refers to observation of the impact of global warming happening worldwide. The intention I find is to settle the fact that human are responsible for this global harmful phenomenon and it should be stopped. There are concrete facts presented in the website including the root cause which is the greenhouse gases. Well argued facts are presented to link human generation of the gas and how it harms the environment. Everything lead to the proposition of fact that why global warming is a concern.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/25/stephen-colbert/stephen-colbert-brings-ronald-reagans-tax-raising-/
The Republican candidates all have praised Ronald Reagan and consider him to be their hero. Ted Cruz is one the many Republican who have praised Ronald Reagan for the policies he implemented during his presidency. Ted Cruz used proposition of interpretation when extolling the Tax cuts that Reagan implemented but forgetting the part that Reagan also raised taxes, which Stephen Colbert mentioned. This was big example of how Republican focus and interpret certain policies while leaving out the rest as something that never happened even though Ronald Reagan did implement tax and other many social programs.