Intro

in the introduction, the authors provide temples that structure different ways to state your argument and compare it to different points of view. As they put in figure 2,  “….what you are saying might be clear to your audience but why you are saying it won’t be.” It is important to summarize the response and then respond to the counter argument. Over all the authors are trying to say that it is crucial to state your argument while listening to others, giving a proper response to the opponent and using your own voice when referring to outside information.

I agree with what the authors state about to response and the presentation of your argument. I also like the statement when they state “since it allows you to avoid a simple yes or no response and present a more complicated argument” when they talk about agreeing and disagreeing. This is a valid fact because it makes the debate more interesting and educational. It keeps your mind open to learning new facts or perspectives.

Chapter 1

this chapter states that there needs to be a cohesive structure when you are talk about two perspectives. You should also be neutral yet be fair and talk about both the perspectives by putting yourself  in their position. Also you should use quotes, without plagiarizing, to summarize their point of view.

“The order in which things are said: to keep the audience engaged, a writer needs to explain what he or she is responding to…”(20)

“Readers won’t be able to follow your unfolding response, much less any complications you may offer, unless you keep reminding them what claims you are responding to.”(27)

“good summaries require a balance between what someone else has said and your interests as a writer.” (37)

Would it be  proper to state your opinion on a fact that you liked about one author but then you don’t state the negative opinion of the other author?