By: Larissa D.
One of the most amazing things about the English language is that a single word, spelled only one way, can have multiple different meanings. Take the word argument, for example. An argument can be a disagreement between two individuals (or two groups or even a single person and a large mob) that can turn nasty or even violent. But an argument can also be the means by which an individual attempts to illustrate a certain point of view on a subject. For instance, the argument could be made for more measures put in place to prevent man-made disasters, such as the chemical spill into the Elk River that was previously discussed in this blog. However, one cannot simply state that there should be more environmental controls applied to private companies like Freedom Industries. There must be evidence from credible sources to support this claim in order to present a logical argument.
Logic is truly the backbone of any argument. Without logic, an argument can become laughable. To say, “There should be more protective measures put into place to prevent future man-made disasters because I said so,” would turn off even the most receptive of audiences. There must be more than “because I said so” – there must be a why. Why does the person presenting the argument think that there should be more controls in place? What evidence is there to support this idea? Does the evidence presented come from experts in the field, or laymen who like to run their mouths about a problem with no evidence to back up their claims? Whether these questions are stated bluntly or not, the human mind often considers these things when it is presented with an argument.
I have had some experience with argument writing, although when I was in high school, it was called a persuasive essay. It was the writer’s job to present a logical argument and persuade the audience to adopt his or her thesis as a true statement. At least that is how I remember them… Granted this all took place more than seven years ago, so my high school memories are not as sharp as they once were. In preparing an argument paper in my English 101 class, I am getting a refresher on taking a stand on a controversial issue and presenting evidence to support my claim.
I have chosen to write my paper on the topic noted above: the argument that more environmental controls should be applied to private companies in order to prevent future man-made disasters. I will not simply state my argument and leave it at that. My readers will want to know why my thesis is sound. They will ask themselves, “Why should there be more controls in place? Why should we allow government agencies like the DEP to have more control over privately owned companies? Why should we care about this issue?” The answers to these questions lie within the evidence that will be presented in the paper. I plan to not only research the circumstances surrounding the chemical spill at Freedom Industries, but to also examine another man-made catastrophe in West Virginia: the Buffalo Creek disaster in 1972, which occurred when a series of dams that had been built to contain coal mine waste failed and a large-scale flood ensued. I plan to look into what regulations existed at the time of both incidents and how those regulations were being enforced. I plan to examine why these events were allowed to occur and to ask myself what else could have been done (and by whom) to prevent these disasters.
As for the question of why the audience should care, the answer is simple: because one day, someone that reads my paper may be in the wrong place at the wrong time and end up on the business end of a man-made environmental disaster. Once a person loses his home, a loved one, or even his own life to a preventable catastrophe, it will matter to him. But should he wait until that day comes and it is too late to do anything about it? Or would he rather attempt to prevent those loses before they occur? While I was not personally affected by either of the aforementioned disasters (I was not even a glimmer in my parents’ eyes in 1972), I do live downstream of a plant that uses creosote in their production of timber products. Do I want to wait until that chemical spills into my water supply and makes my children sick before I worry about the effectiveness of the measures currently in place to prevent such an event? Absolutely not. My goal is to clearly illustrate to my readers why this issue is important through the evidence that I will present within my paper. While it may not change anyone’s mind, it should at least make them think.
No comments:
Post a Comment