Considering Types

This blog post will look at the different types of argument would be the most effective or least effective for my argumentation project.

Found Animals Foundation, "Cat Argument 4" August 29th, 2011
Attribution Share Alike

I believe either the Position argument or the Causal argument would be the best fit for my paper. Position arguments look at specific policy or ideas in a policy debate. For my own topic, I could discuss future plans with Pompeii (for example, the plan to add a train station) and argue the pros and cons of this plan. I could compare it to other failed or successful ideas and create an argument about Pompeii's handling by using a specific new plan. The Casual argument is an introduction to the causes of a specific problem, and argues for potential solutions as well. This would probably be the strongest fit, as I want to argue that Italy has failed to protect Pompeii, and this would be one of my "direct causes" towards the issue.

Probably the one that would fit this project the worst would be the Refutation. A Refutation argument has the specific purpose of refuting the opposing arguments for your topic. Seeing as I've been struggling to find people who openly speak against conservation or Pompeii, this would be a difficult paper for me to write. I can give good reasons as to why I believe my topic is important, but with little evidence to refute, the paper will be weak and one-sided.

REFLECTION

I read Chloe's Rhetorical Action Plan and her Considering Types post. After I had read her post, I ended up going back and changing one of my possible genres for this controversy. Therefore my rhetorical action plan is likely slightly more different than my initial comment on her post, but we were in agreement for the Considering types post. We both thought the Position argument style would be beneficial for our respective controversies, though I could see us using it in slightly different formats.
I also read Alex's Rhetorical Action Plan and Considering Types. Alex's paper was more concise than my own, and managed to generally cover everything. He chose to consider a more visual option, like a TED talk, which I think would be really interesting to watch. For his types post, we also both picked the causal and position arguments. However, Alex chose different levels of appropriateness for each type of argument. His blog post definitely went more in depth than mine did, and I may want to look over each type of argument again.
The comment I received encouraged me using an article format over an academic style paper, and I probably agree that would be more interesting.