When we look at the article which is from the New York Times which is found in the url http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/opinion/election-2014-should-black-voters-keep-their-faith-in-obama.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 , it is seen that the person who wrote the article which is titled Election 2014: Should Black Voters Keep Their Faith in Obama?”, was not arguing from an authority’s point of view. This is because the points which are put forth by him in the article are not showing as if he is an authority in the field. He is just expressing his thoughts those are what he thinks the blacks are. As this discussion ensues, we might find the type of argument which is being put forth by the writer.
When we move onto the second procedure of arguing, it’s the type known as the method. Reasoning from method is based on warrants which are about the approved status of the methods or the techniques which are used when producing information. The focus of this type of argument is always on the achieved status of power. An example can be approved statistical methods which are approved. Sometimes, the method means of arguing involves the use of qualitative, hermeneutic or even the ethnographic methods. These can always be seen as a method which is common in politics. The people who write the opinion pieces in the magazines are always people who have the ability to analyze politics. That is the reason the article is likely to be one which was written on the method argumentation.
Another commonly method or procedure which is used when analyzing arguments I based on generalizations. Reasoning from generalizations is based on the similarities which are found between samples. The samples are always found from the selected population. The samples are drawn randomly. This however does not always mean that generalizations are made randomly (Infante, DeVito & Denton, 1988). The generalizations are made from qualitative comparisons which are made. When we take the first article, which is about the American election, we can say that a little bit of generalizations were used when writing the opinion piece. He tries to compare what several philosophers have said when it comes to the fear and oppression which the Black have always experienced in America. He further says that black turnout which has always been since the law which allowed the vote in 1965 was amended, has made many blacks elected into the office. He counts several offices which are currently held by the black during the Obama rein. He says that it is even the Black’s high turnout that made Obama win the election during the year 2004 as a senator and in 2008 as a president. All these techniques which are used by the author are mere generalizations. He believes that it is the reason why things are the way they are.
He further believes that the majority of Blacks are not happy with the way Obama has neglected them. They feel that the president is not doing much to help in ‘liberating’ them. This s because he gives a scenario where by it is the blacks who are many in the detention cells. He has done nothing to help change the situation. Many of the blacks are still leaving below 2 dollars a day. This he equates with poverty and suffering. It might be true that the Black American is staying in abject poverty but this cannot be blamed on the general, the president. He cannot provide for each and every resident. These are therefore regarded as mere generalizations.
The second article is obtained from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/opinion/americas-big-bet-on-indonesia.html?_r=0. It is titled America’s Big Bet on Indonesia. This is an opinion piece which appeared on November 4, 2014.When going back to the procedures which are given in the article that can be used to argue, there is one know as analogy. Reasoning from analogies is always based on the similarities which are found in any given case and the relations characteristic. An example given in the article is a condition a government plans to “quarantine” a country by interdicting all the illegal drugs. This is because the illegal drugs are seen as being “infectious disease” is based on some type of reasoning that being that quarantine has been used to do away with the infectious diseases, then interdiction will also help do away with the illegal drugs (The New York Times, 2014 n.d).
Another argumentation procedure which is put forth by the article is the one known as the use of the parallel case. Reasoning which is based on the parallel case is always based on the similarities which is found on the two or more cases during the policy making process. An example of parallel case can be seen in a claim where one believes that a local government will be very successful when dealing with pollution can only be said basing arguments on the fact the a parallel policy was implemented elsewhere successfully.
When looking at the article, it is said that Indonesia is a country with the largest Muslim majority and the elections which are just like the ones which were held in Tunisia, was peaceful. The writer further adds that this showed that Muslim nations can also evolve peacefully in the democratic systems. There are two parallel cases which have been used in presenting these arguments. The first is that the peaceful nature of Tunisia is being compared with what was experienced in Indonesia. The second case is seen in the point where the writer says that the even the Muslims under democratic systems can stay peaceful. This, the writer tries the compare the countries which have always been peaceful because of the existence of the democratic systems.
When the assumptions which have been forth in the articles are critically analyzed, it can be seen that the second article which talked about the American’s bet on Indonesia, can be said to be more plausible. Arguably, the one that addressed the African American Perception on the President, Obama, had personal feel that was the truth. The writer majored on what he is feeling rather the real situation on the ground. The second one used more parallel case which uses what exists to determine what might happen next.
When a stakeholder analysis is made on healthcare, it’s found that there a number of stakeholders who are affected as well those who affects it. The stakeholders include the doctors, the parents, and the leaders. By leaders, it is meant those who are elected in office to represent a certain particular group. Another group of stake holders who are affected are the patients themselves.
When talking about the war which was happening in Bosnia, the United States was reluctant to end the war. They did not want to be associated with it. However, in summer during the year 1995, they finally took a leadership role to ensure that the war ended. This resulted in the end of the long term feuds which had been experienced in the area. Many did not however understand why the United States had to wait for that long before intervening (Sloan, 1998).
Infante, D. A., DeVito, J. A., & Denton, R. E. (1988). Arguing constructively. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
The New York Times. (n.d.). Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/opinion/election-2014-should-black-voters-keep-their-faith-in-obama.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
The New York Times. (n.d.). Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/opinion/americas-big-bet-on-indonesia.html?_r=0
Sloan, E. C. (1998). Bosnia and the new collective security. Westport, CT: Praeger.