There are two distinct parts to this paper. In the first part you will argue against something that you believe in. In the second, you will begin to outline the ways in which you will convince the imaginary person who wrote the first part of the paper of the other side of the argument.
First, find a successful public policy that interests you and that you would like to see adopted, whether in the United States or in an imaginary perfect country.
Even though you agree with this policy, the first part of the paper should be a persuasive argument that convinces the reader to come to the opposite conclusion from the one you have drawn. In other words, you should write the op-ed that someone who thinks this idea will not work would send to the New York Times.
Assume the author is a logical and thoughtful person who truly wants to improve the situation described in the article, but who does not agree with this particular solution. That person is, of course, also brilliant and an excellent writer. In other words, put yourself in that person’s shoes and show how you can be empathetic. Consider that person’s moral framework and address your arguments to him or her.
This will take research, both because you will need to marshal ideas for this side of the argument that is not natural to you and because you will need facts and data to back up your argument. Don’t forget to explore the assumptions on both sides of the argument. If you know someone who disagrees with you, you can use that person’s “expertise” as part of your research.
As part of your persuasive argument, you may want to create an infographic that can persuade readers that this side of the argument is the better one.
Grading considerations:
Strength of argument—20 points
Strength of data—20 points
Understanding of assumptions-10 points
Understanding of moral framework=10 points
Well-written and well-organized-10 points
Improvement over earlier efforts-10 points
Part Two 1 pages)
Second, return to your own ideas and opinions and start thinking about how you will convince the person who disagrees with you that your ideas are worth pursuing. You do not need to write the opposing essay at this point, but you should take the following steps to help you prepare for the final paper you will write. Please write a paragraph or two for each of these questions. You will develop these ideas more completely in your final paper.
1. Look again at one or more article(s) you have read and the facts and/or data that are in that/those article(s). Which facts and data are worth using to persuade the person who wrote Part One? Which need more elaboration? Which need more documentation? Why do you come to this conclusion? (10 points)
2. What other data have you found that will help this side of the argument? Why do you think they will be helpful? (10 points)
3. Look again at the persuasive arguments used in the article(s) you chose and in the research you have done. Now that you have thought about the other point of view and the assumptions people with that viewpoint hold, how well do the arguments in this article hold up? How, if at all, would you address the issue differently now that you understand this viewpoint? Please explain your answer. (10 points)
4. Thinking about the assumptions and arguments that people who hold the other viewpoint have, what strategy or strategies do you think would help convince this person that your solution is a good one? Explain why and how you would implement this strategy, and please remember that you are trying to convince a reasonable person who has the same ultimate goals that you have (a clean environment, a prosperous economy, etc.) (10 points)
Second
Paper
There
are
two
distinct
parts
to
this
paper.
In
the
first
part
you
will
argue
against
something
that
you
believe
in.
In
the
second,
you
will
begin
to
outline
the
ways
in
which
you
will
convince
the
imaginary
person
who
wrote
the
first
part
of
the
paper
of
the
other
side
of
the
argument.
Part
One:
(4
pages)
First,
find
a
successful
public
policy
that
interests
you
and
that
you
would
like
to
see
adopted,
whether
in
the
United
States
or
in
an
imaginary
perfect
country.
Even
though
you
agree
with
this
policy,
the
first
part
of
the
paper
should
be
a
persuasive
argument
that
convinces
the
reader
to
come
to
the
opposite
conclusion
from
the
one
you
have
drawn.
In
other
words,
you
should
write
the
op-ed
that
someone
who
thinks
this
idea
will
not
work
would
send
to
the
New
York
Times.
Assume
the
author
is
a
logical
and
thoughtful
person
who
truly
wants
to
improve
the
situation
described
in
the
article,
but
who
does
not
agree
with
this
particular
solution.
That
person
is,
of
course,
also
brilliant
and
an
excellent
writer.
In
other
words,
put
yourself
in
that
person
’
s
shoes
and
show
how
you
can
be
empathetic.
Consider
that
person
’
s
moral
framework
and
address
your
arguments
to
him
or
her.
This
will
take
research,
both
because
you
will
need
to
marshal
ideas
for
this
side
of
the
argument
that
is
not
natural
to
you
and
because
you
will
need
facts
and
data
to
back
up
your
argument.
Don
’
t
forget
to
explore
the
assumptions
on
both
sides
of
the
argument.
If
you
know
someone
who
disagrees
with
you,
you
can
use
that
person
’
s
“
expertise
”
as
part
of
your
research.
As
part
of
your
persuasive
argument,
you
may
want
to
create
an
infographic
that
can
persuade
readers
that
this
side
of
the
argument
is
the
better
one.
Grading
considerations:
Strength
of
argument
—
20
points
Strength
of
data
—
20
points
Understanding
of
assumptions-
10
points
Understanding
of
moral
framework=
10
points
Well-written
and
well-organized-
10
points
Improvement
over
earlier
efforts-
10
points
Part
Two
1
pages)
Second,
return
to
your
own
ideas
and
opinions
and
start
thinking
about
how
you
will
convince
the
person
who
disagrees
with
you
that
your
ideas
are
worth
pursuing.
You
do
not
need
to
write
the
opposing
essay
at
this
point,
but
you
should
take
the
following
steps
to
help
you
prepare
for
john snowman
Secondpaperinstructions.docx
0
