MODES OF DEVELOPMENT Definition o is defined as, means, refers to, to define, to illustrate Exemplification o after all, as an example, for instance, namely, stated differently Description(Sensory and Spatial) o above, across, between, beyond Chronological/Procedural o about, afterwards, first Listing o additionally, and then, as well, besides Comparison-Contrast o Also, as, both, and yet, conversely Classification and Division o another, classified as, the last group Cause and Effect o as, because, for that reason Problem-Solution o but, first, second, one solution is Persuasion o in that case, again, for this reason INTERTEXT – refers to a work whose meaning is shaped by referencing or calling to mind other texts HYPERTEXT – external links embedded in a text by the writer CLAIMS Claim of Fact – an argument about a quantifiable topic - only asserts a stand regarding a debatable topic Claim of Value – argues whether something is good or bad - based on judgment and evaluation on a philosophical, aesthetic, or moral standpoint Claim of Policy – argument which asserts the implementation of a certain policy - generally states solution and plans that are procedural and organized LOGICAL FALLACIES - are errors in reasoning that invalidate an argument FALLACY False Dilemma DESCRIPTION arguer presents his argument as one of only two options despite the presence of multiple possibilities Appeal to Ignorance Slippery Slope Complex Question Appeal to Force Appeal to Pity Appeal to Consequences Bandwagon Attacking the Person Appeal to Authority Anonymous Authority Hasty Generalization False Analogy Accident Post Hoc Wrong Direction Complex Cause Irrelevant Conclusion Straw Man Affirming the Consequent Denying the Antecedent inconsistency something is instantly concluded to be true just because it is not proven false, vice versa series of increasingly superficial and consequences are drawn two or more points are rolled into one | one point may be satisfactory while the other is not a threat, instead of reasoning is used to argue element of pity is used instead of logical reasoning unpleasant consequences believing something are pointed out to show that the belief is false argument is considered to be valid because it is what the majority thinks someone tries to refute an argument by attacking the person argument quotes an expert who is not qualified in the subject authority is not mentioned or named a sample is not significant or enough to support a generalization writer assumes that two concepts that are similar in other ways general rule is applied to a situation, even when it should be an exception arguer claims that since event A happened before B, A is the cause of B direction between cause and effect is reversed explanation for an event is reduced to one thing when there are other factors which also contributed to the event argument which is supposed to prove something concludes something else instead position of the opposition is twisted so that it is easier to refute if A is true then B is true; if B is true therefore A is true if A is true then B is true; if A is not true then B is not true Arguments contradict one another
