Based on the literature review research, I established that the common purposes for arguments are to persuade and to solicit support for ideas or certain approaches of doing things. For instance, in one of the articles, the author intended to persuade stakeholders in the education sector that the adoption of technology could help foster effective learning of students with learning disabilities such as dyslexia. In one way, the author was soliciting support for implementation of technology in schools to assist learners. These purposes of arguments are effective for my discipline because I realize my field will require use of communication skills. That means that I will have to learn the art of persuasion and making others listen to my ideas. Consciously or unconsciously, my objective will be to make other people support my ideas, especially in the implementation of change.
The article soliciting for the implementation of technology to help students with learning disabilities partially meets the criteria for what makes an effective argument. Firstly, the author comes up with a claim that technology can transform the learning process. Obviously, one would expect the author to substantiate or explain how technology exactly does that. The author provided evidence from multiple studies, which to me are good enough as evidence for the claim. Nevertheless, the author only dwells on studies that support his claim and forgets to analyze even one study that states the contrary. Therefore, the argument becomes one-sided.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
One logical fallacy is present in the literature review of the article. The author, despite providing multiple studies as evidence for the claim, does not provide specific details. All the evidence provided are summaries, which lack strong points to persuade people with contrary opinions. Therefore, the argument becomes superficial, with a strong claim but weak points to support the claim.
