From theorizing, we move to investigating. Here, our focus is on using the theor

By
Responsive Centered Red Button

Need Help with this Question or something similar to this? We got you! Just fill out the order form (follow the link below), and your paper will be assigned to an expert to help you ASAP.

Order Form

From theorizing, we move to investigating. Here, our focus is on using the theories we’ve read to help us examine contemporary arguments. We’re trying to decide what constitutes “good argument” and why, and we’re trying to make that decision for real cases in a digitally mediated world.
We’re not just looking at the kinds of arguments that professional scholars make in academic articles and books, but also at journalism, YouTube videos, comics, comments sections, Facebook discussions, Instagram posts, and more. Ultimately, you’ll write a systematic (7-10 pages) essay defining “good argument in digital contexts” in your own terms (engaging with our shared theoretical readings, and analyzing at least one good and one bad argument, such as those turned up by our collective investigations).
The goal of this stage, in combination with Stage 1, is to help you articulate a thoughtful, well-reasoned argument for the kinds of arguments you yourself want to make in a digitally mediated world.
In this assignment, you will develop your own systematic definition of good argument, specifically oriented toward argument in digital contexts. Your definition will function as the thesis driving your essay, which will (a) elaborate, (b) argue for, (c) test the limits of, and (d) revise and/or discuss the implications of that thesis. As a whole, your essay will make a persuasive case for your definition of good argument in digital contexts.
Building a systematic theory of good argument in digital contexts means moving beyond your own immediate beliefs and/or preferences to say something that might be broadly persuasive. At the same time, this really should be your definition, i.e., should be a definition you want to use in your own life going forward. Your task in this assignment is to develop and argue for a definition that you wish to use for yourself and that, at the very least, you think other people should value as legitimate.
Here are some things your essay should accomplish (NOTE: the following is NOT an outline of the paper, but a sort of checklist of things it should cover):
Articulate and argue for a definition of good argument
specify that argument for digital contexts;
nominate a range or series of subtypes of good argument in digital contexts;
explain the “why?”s of your definition, the reasons for its legitimacy/value
Test-drive your definition via in-depth rhetorical analysis of at least two arguments appearing in digital contexts (i.e., two rhetorical artifacts);
develop strong analyses of the rhetorical artifacts (at least one that is mostly “good” and at least one that is mostly “bad”);
articulate the ways in which these rhetorical artifacts do and do not operate in accordance with what your definition would look for or expect;
use at least 4 of the theoretical sources we’ve read together as a class to help you notice and explain details that you otherwise might not (two rhetorical theory sources and two sources about digital contexts)
Revise your definition as needed, and articulate its larger social significance
if necessary, suggest some ways that revising the definition you started out with could be useful;
describe key social impacts or implications that would follow if your definition were to be broadly adopted;
articulate the definition’s value for your own life;
clarify already articulated reasons why others should adopt—or at least value—your definition
I said that the above is not an outline of the paper, and it is not. However, it does suggest one possible flow for the essay as a whole. Your essay should have a clear beginning, middle, and end—moving the reader from increasingly deep comprehension of your basic thesis to, ideally, agreement with it or at least agreement that it is a legitimate way of thinking about good argument. To that end, it may be helpful to (1) begin with an introduction that leads up to a definition with reasons, (2) move through rhetorical analyses that test the limits of that definition, and (3) conclude with some revision of the definition and assessment of its value or utility for both yourself and others.
The essay should be formatted as a coherent argument throughout, with a core thesis (the condensed articulation of your definition) and a series of arguments for that thesis, efforts to test its limits, and revisions to it and/or explorations of its consequences.
REQUIREMENTS:
These are the things that you should do as you compose your Defining Good Argument project
You should draw upon and cite from the course readings and your previous assignments when and where necessary.
You should compose a 7-10 page paper or a multimodal equivalent.
If your compose a written document, please submit a Word document rather than PDF.
You should save your files according to the file saving system articulated in our course policies, procedures, and expectation page under “Course Materials”.
You should draft and revise for readability, concision, precise language use, and creativity.
You should include works cited or reference page (MLA or APA style, respectively) for those works you cite in your statement.

How to create Testimonial Carousel using Bootstrap5

Clients' Reviews about Our Services