- The aim that they should have used in this argument is “Arguing to inquire.” They should have used this aim because they were trying to find a solution to the death tax. They seemed to be bias, and didn’t really talk about what the actual subject was about.
- They violated this by not including any real information to support their case. They used hypothetical information instead of real evidence
- -Neither of the speakers had any reliable evidence on their opinions of the death tax therefore they didn’t support their reasonings well.
-They way that they ended it, there was no follow up to the argument because they agree to not talk about it again.
-They didn’t argue with their audience in mind, they didn’t think about what their audience would have wanted. They wanted to fight with each other.
– They were not listening to each other and not being critical
How could these new criteria help you with assignment one?
– This new criteria can help me with assignment one by giving me a guideline that i should follow in order to get my point across and be an effective argument
