Have A Question?
Get in touch!
Arguments are the cornerstone of persuasive communication. They are combinations of statements made that are intended to change the minds of other people.
All arguments have structure which should follow logically from its premise to conclusion explained through the way by:
Premise
A premise of an argument is something that is put forward as a truth, but which is not proven. Although it is not proven, it is assumed to be true.
For example, wearing school uniform prevents bullying.
If you want to attack another person's argument, you can challenge the truth of their premises. If you are making an argument, you should be ready to defend any of your own premises. The more complex the premise, the more opportunity there is to challenge it. Therefore, in the exam, for your premise, it is recommended that you include 1 argument per paragraph and generally, a non-controversial view.
Conclusion
The conclusion is the statement with which you want the other person to agree. It is drawn from the premises of the argument.
For example, wearing school uniform prevents bullying on personal appearance.
Inference
Between the conclusion and the premise are further statements which translate the premises into the conclusion. This is the reasoning process, and in a formal argument uses careful logic.
Wearing school uniform prevents bullying as:
Let's look at some examples for how arguments develop:
EXAMPLE 1
First, the plant presents a reliable solution to the problem of future limited resources because changes in climate have created uncertainty regarding the future availability of water. For example, if a long drought were to hit Victoria again, the impact on quality of life would be severely affected as water will be limited. However, with the desalination plant, Victorians can be assured that they will have sufficient water in volatile climate conditions so that humans, animals and plants will not suffer.
EXAMPLE 2
Australia does not need to continue being part of the Bristish Monarchy. As now, this country is fully developed and we are able to run our own country. Australia is now becoming one of the most richest countries in the world which means that we are capable of independence. Australia was meant to be independent in the first place. Look at it, it is alone standing out as the only country and continent there is in the world.
Australia has been under British rule for ages yet the British haven't exactly guided us. We have been ruling the country ourselves and there is only one spokeswoman/man of the queen to oversee us. Australia is thriving in industries and the only reason that we are in the monarchy is because of how rich our land is.
Australia is the most independent country in the world as it is literally the most isolated country in the world yet it hasn't turned into a barren wasteland. Why? because Australia is independent enough to split out of the British Monarchy.
Australia deserves to be independent.
EXAMPLE 3
plan
the monarchy is outdated because:
queen is juust a figure head
too much publicity surrounds the queen and royal family
no use in society
we are no longer in the medieval ages so why do we have a monarchy? for australia being part of a monarchy brings nothing but possitivity to our country. although the queen may not have much power being part of the british monarchy brings many benefits and visits from the royal family are always taken greatly.
for australia beinjg part of the monarchy brings many benefits. the most substantional benefit is the partnership and cooporation we have with the british empire. by being part of the monarchy it gives australia a unique connection with britian, a very powerful country. their is no downsides to this as the queen has little power of australia and if she tryed to enforce the little power she had she would most likely be shunned away.
allthough the idea of a monarchy appears outdated in todays modern world it is still part of the british tradition. the royal family are just a family for other people to look up to. they are their to give a sense of overall power and are displayed as a happy loving family who run the entire world when in reality they have no power over australia. it would be stupid and nationalistic to pull away from the monarchy
the queen is great atraction aswell as other members of the royal family. they are allways being shown in the media and when they come to australia we allways welcome with wide arms. even though the queen is just a figure head she is synonymous as a great part of society.
it is great that we as a nation are part of the monarchy. if connects us to britian letting us leach off their power, they have no control over australia meaning their are no bad effects and they are a great role model and a family to look up to for young children. is it really that necessary that we are completely independant in the world?
EXAMPLE 4
Tram travels in zone one should not be made free. This takes sums of money away from important amenities such as schools and hospitals, which could be highly benefited. Another reason why zone one tram travels should not be made free, is that more people would tend to stay closer to the zone, resulting in an apparent reduction of space.
The free tram service takes away money from benefiting amenities, which could help the whole community. Rather than proposing an idea of spending one hundred million dollars to provide free tram transportation up to zone one, it would be highly advisable to donate this money towards hospitals and schools. For example, providing funds for schools would be beneficial for the students in the community and thus this would go towards their education. Giving the money to hospitals would ensure that the sanitary levels are checked and the patients are highly taken care of. Furthermore, providing free tram service would take away the proportionate amount of funding from necessity community amenities.
Making zone one tram travels free, would result in more people staying closer to those areas. This means that as the zone one trip is free, most people would decide to live within the zone one area. For example, a man who lives in Hoppers Crossing, it is mandatory for him to buy a zone two ticket, whilst a woman staying in Laverton would not need to buy a ticket, as she lives in the zone one range. Paying a three dollar ticket would be a daily cost for him, as this would result him in moving closer to the zone one range. As more and more people decide to follow this same method, consequently the zone one areas would be overpopulated. Therefore, more people would tend to live in a zone one area, regarding the cost.
Some may argue that making zone one tram travels would benefit the poor people who cannot afford to pay a tram ticket. This would show a sense of humanity towards the poor and this would show that we care and understand them. However, this would be considered highly unfair for many others who are forced to buy a tram ticket, poor or not. This does not show equality towards the zone one and two travelers.
In conclusion, tram travelling in zone one should be made free. Money being used for the "enhancement" for this free transport can be used for improvising the main community needs, such as hospitals and schools. This would in order benefit schools, hospitals and overall, the community. The free tram travels can also lead to an overpopulation of residents who decide to move closer to the zone one area. Overall, making tram travelling free up to zone one should be not encouraged by all Victorians.
Key Rules to remember:
All arguments have structure which should follow logically from its premise to conclusion explained through the way by:
A well-developed argument supports its premise and is logically connected from beginning (premise) to end (conclusion).
Now it's time to do your assignment.