After reading the topic question and the evidence provided below, you will organize an argument. remember: write in complete sentences write in the third person point of view do not use feelings or emotions you will not be writing a complete argumentative essay. topic question: should reality television shows be banned? instructions: you will organize an argument against the televising of reality television shows. read the evidence below and then organize your argument. (copy and paste the outline below into the feedback box and add your information.) argument organizer claim: in your own words reason 1: in your own words support for reason 1: quote from the evidence below reason 2: in your own words support for reason 2: quote from the evidence below counterclaim: what is the opposing point of view rebuttal support: quote from the evidence below conclusion clincher: negative effects that will occur if your readers do not follow your claim evidence 1 negative effects of reality television research conducted by dr. douglas gentile concluded that people who watch reality television shows on a regular basis tend to show more aggressive behaviors such as humiliating others with sarcasm and disrespect. the more realistic the aggression is on the show, the more this influences the viewer. excerpt from a study by dr. douglas gentile, psychologist evidence 2 negative effects of reality television a study showed that reality television viewing encourages negative racial stereotypes and prejudice. so, instead of to eliminate ideas about race and crime, these "reality" shows reinforce these stereotypes to tell a better "story" about the crimes. excerpt from research by cavender and bond-maupin (1999) evidence 3 negative effects of reality television “people imitate our reality television shows and then blame us when they get in trouble. people ask me all the time if our reality shows are "real." to be honest, there are many scenes that we "set up" to make them look like reality, but they are not. many of our shows have scripts and we plan the reactions with the actors ahead of time.” excerpt from an interview with ms. carnwallis, tht channel, television producer

formal arguments

in written, formal arguments, the best way to build credibility with readers is to provide them with evidence. no matter what your argument might be and which side you agree with, citing strong evidence to back up your claim leaves the opposition with little to argue.

emotional appeal is often used in oral arguments. written arguments, however, rely on four main types of evidence. as you read further, you will see that some types are more credible than others and "hold more water" so to speak.

statistical evidence

the strongest type of evidence in formal writing is statistical evidence. this ranges from true, hard data presented as a percentage or number, to survey-type data. for example, statistical evidence could be:

4 out of 5 experts claim

85% of women in the united

7 members were present

statistical evidence can be proven as fact. you can actually go out and find hard information to prove your particular claim.

testimonial evidence

the use of celebrities as credibility evidence can be considered testimonial in nature. many people look up to celebrities as role models in their lives. good or bad, when a person chooses a life-path that takes them into public light, there will be many others out there who want to emulate the celebrity. these celebrity endorsements provide the second-strongest type of evidence found in formal arguments.

testimonial evidence can also be collected from experts and authorities in a given field. doctors, dentists, lawyers often provide expert testimonials. their authority is not often questions. they are expected to "know their stuff."

anecdotal evidence

when storytelling is involved as evidence, anecdotal evidence is being used. due to its less objective nature, anecdotal evidence is not extremely strong. when coupled with statistical or testimonial evidence, anecdotal evidence can be highly effective in determining credibility or proof.

storytelling, although based on fact, can include quite a bit of opinion, thus making it less objective. usually, eyewitnesses are used as providers of anecdotal evidence. they saw or experienced the phenomenon at hand are telling their version or side of the story.

analogical evidence

when information is scarce about something and little is known, analogical evidence is often used in a formal argument to increase credibility of the proof. if the phenomenon in question is new and little is known about it, analogical evidence that pulls in known factors about a similar phenomenon to show parallels can be an effective way to provide proof.

due to limited knowledge about the phenomenon, in this situation, analogical evidence can be regarded as the weakest type of evidence used in formal arguments. one can only imagine and hope that the comparison-phenomenon is close enough that the results can be applied to the new phenomenon.

in the

all that really matters in a formal argument is whether or not the writer has credible evidence to back up what they want to say or what they are thinking. so often, we hear people say, "prove it! " to one another.

one last little formal arguments not only provide credible evidence to support claims, don't forget that acknowledgment of the opposing point of view in an argument also strengthens the entire product.

they should gives us more chances to make friend and do stupid things

the correct answers are alternatives c and e.

travelling east from hormuz, venetian marco polo travels to cathay, which is an ancient name to refer to china, where he stays for several years.

he also visits mongolia. in those times the mongol empire was ruled by kublai kan. in "the travels of marco polo," marco polo met him and became his advisor.