Topics and Questions We Can Help You To Answer:
Paper Instructions:

MY Stance: the program was meant to supplement nutrition but is instead feeding into the country’s unhealthy habits and worsening the obesity epidemic. There should be more rules about how food stamp money is spent. Groups fighting against hunger often receive funding and resources from the food and soda industries, which may be hurt by the restrictions. INSTRUCTIONS: Objective: After spending time studying the elements of effective argumentation and critical thinking within the contexts of a classical argument, where having the ″winning″ argument is the primary goal, we will now be applying those same skills but to a somewhat more delicate context, one where ″winning″ isn′t the only goal. Here, as in many real-world situations, we need to find good solutions while also protecting and/or strengthening our relationship with the audience. The premise: After having made a strong traditional/Aristotelian argument (Project 1) as well as deconstructing another′s argument (Project 2), we will now be combining many of the skills we have practiced between projects 1 and 2 but with a slightly different purpose, creating a Rogerian argument. In this context, we are attempting to realistically solve an issue (or at least part of an issue) by approaching it from a balanced perspective, aiming for a solution that is acceptable to both parties. Again, I am your audience in this scenario, so the context is similar to Project 2, but I will be taking the devil′s advocate position, so write as if I were sympathetic to the opposing viewpoint. The task: First, choose a topic. It can be a new one, or it can be the same as Project 1′s topic (in this case, I′d recommend focusing this topic to one or two of the main ideas rather than the whole argument). Now, however, the discussion needs to have at least as much attention to the strengths of the opposing viewpoint, so choosing a highly debatable topic might make this easier since both sides will have strong stances. Next, following the structure of a Rogerian argument, we will make a balanced argument from both sides of the issue, acknowledge common values, and ultimately create a conclusion meant to unify rather than dominate, likely depending on some kind of mutual compromise. The requirements: Required length: appropriate detail to convince your audience Suggested aim: balanced attention to both perspectives (2+ pages per side) + (1 page intro/conclusion) ＝ approximately 5 pages Sources: appropriate use to convince your audience MLA formatting This includes font, spacing, margins, page number, title info, etc. MLA Citations In-text citations Works Cited