Comprehensive Argument Analysis

Axia College Material

Appendix E

Critical Analysis Forms

Fill out one form for each source.

Source 1 Title and Citation: Concealed Weapons Infringe upon the Personal Freedoms of Others

Chapman, S. (2008). Gun Rights vs. Freedom. Reason Magazine.

1	Identify the principal issue presented by the source.	The principle issue presented in this source concerns the permit of carrying concealed guns to work place for defense. However, only those who drive to wok will have such rights since the permit allows guns concealed in cars. The issue further revolves around the right of business owners to control workers to have guns around their property.
2	Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The topic has managed to eliminate biasness since it presents an argument from both sides. The author has presented why people need to carry concealed guns as well as why it might not be a good idea for those who do not drive to work.
3	Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The author does not explain the connection of the 2^nd amendment to the issue. He only states the amendment but does not say what it states, leaving the reader floating. One has to seek to know what it means from elsewhere. He also does not explain how the right to carry concealed guns attack property rights.
4	Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning.	The source is quite credible since it is published in a periodical that provides news to the public, hence it has to be verified correct.
5	Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	There are no rhetoric devices in the article. This I determined through recognizing that the source is not persuading or trying to convince people to take a particular side. Rather, the source just presents an issue at large to the readers.
6	Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The fallacy here is “This is not a place where the government should substitute its judgment for that of the property owners.” The government is concerned with all people despite where they are, in work or home. Hence, this argument does not make sense. This is a formal logical fallacy.
7	State one argument made by the author.	The author argues that the government should not have control over private property owners such as businesspersons concerning the right to have people carry guns around their property.
8	Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.	The author concludes that requiring all companies to allow concealed guns around their premises is oppressive.
9	Is the author’s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak? Explain how you determined this.	The author’s argument is valid, considering that not everybody might be trusted to carry a gun in the work premises. More so, when he says that it might not favor all people he is right considering not al people drive to work. I determined this through looking at the logic the author presents.
10	Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this.	The author uses moral reasoning in the article to come up with an argument concerning the issue.

Source 2 Title and Citation: Concealed Weapons Protect Personal Freedoms

Hawkins, A.W.R. (2008). Freedom Reigns For All with Concealed Carry Law. Human Events.

1	Identify the principal issue presented by the source.	The issue presented in this source is guns being a good means of protecting property and enhancing reduction in crime considering victims would have defense on their side, hence the attacker will think twice.
2	Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The author is biased as he only tells of the effectiveness of allowing concealed guns in deterring crime since it discourages a would-be criminal. It does not tell of the opposite side or the negative effect that could result.
3	Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The statement that claims when we are free they are free is a little vague since it does not idea clear explanation of why guns would make them free. It also leaves the reader asking whether they were not free before having guns.
4	Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning.	The source is credible since it is from a published periodical that like any other goes through verification. More so, it provides statistical data that asserts its argument.
5	Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The author uses rhetoric devices when he talks about Texas and guns. The word guns are repeated several times to in the same statement to lay emphasis.
6	Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The fallacy used in this source is when he says; when I am free, you are free. The conclusion about this premise is that because the gun has a deterring effect on would be criminals, other people are free. This does not connect with the premise. This is a formal fallacy of logic with an argument, which is not understood.
7	State one argument made by the author.	The author argues that allowing people to carry concealed guns is going to deter crime significantly since everybody will be free.
8	Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.	The author concludes the argument by saying that when they are free, others are free too. This is to mean that if all people were to carry concealed guns, not only property will be protected, but also crime.
9	Is the author’s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak? Explain how you determined this.	The author’s argument is valid considering he does use statistical data to support his claim.
10	Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this.	The author uses moral reasoning to argue that having guns will deter crime, which he feels is the right thing to do.

Source 3 Title and Citation: Islam Advocates Suicide Terrorism

World Net Daily. (2006). Suicide Bombers Follow Quran, Concludes Pentagon Briefing. WorldNetDaily.com

1	Identify the principal issue presented by the source.	The principle issue presented in this source is that the Islamic religion does advocate for people to engage in suicide bombing. The suicide bombers refer to the Quran for justification of their actions. Before they commit the act, they recite some passages from the Quran that promises them martyrdom upon defending their religion. This suggests that Islam does support suicide bombing since it is viewed as a religious course.
2	Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	In the article, there is no biasness presented by the author. The author has cited several people who assert that his idea is true. For instance, he cites some of the interviews done on Muslim families to the suicide bombers who confirm it is true that the Quran does support suicide bombing where they say dying for Allah is a great martyrdom.
3	Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	No vague or ambiguous ideas are presented by the author. The author has used easily understandable language to explain his ideas. He has fully supported them with credible information from the people interviewed. After reading and analyzing, everything was clear to me why suicide bombers exist.
4	Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning.	The sources used in the article are quite credible. For instance, the use of periodicals means that the story had been researched and verified before publishing. In addition, he has used primary sources such as books. Such sources are approved before they are published to ensure information presented is true.
5	Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The author has used several rhetoric devices to lay emphasis on his points. For instance, to stress why suicide bombers act the way they do, in the first paragraph of suicide for Allah he keeps starting the short phrases with the word “he”.
6	Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The author does not use any fallacies in the article. All ideas are supported with evidence either from a book or from interviews held to assert its truth. There are no arguments made without evidence from other sources. I determined this through analyzing the whole content of the source, which I easily understood.
7	State one argument made by the author.	One argument the author makes is that the suicide bombers engage in such acts not because of religion in some circumstances considering that no body might be fighting against Islam, but do it for the rewards promised by the Quran and financial rewards to their families.
8	Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.	The author concludes this argument by saying that majority of the suicide bombers are motivated by the promises of the Quran such as virgins waiting for them, as well as rewards for their families.
9	Is the author’s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak? Explain how you determined this.	The argument of the author is quite valid and sound considering that among those known to commit suicide bombing, almost all of them are Muslims doing it in the name of their religion. More so, Muslim leaders have confirmed this through their praise for those who die in the suicide attacks.
10	Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this.	The author does not make any moral reasoning, rather, he only provides a report of what research has shown or what others have asserted in the past. Reasoning requires stating what is right or wrong, which the author has not done. All the author does is present the scenario.

Source 4 Title and Citation: Islam Does not Advocate Suicide Terrorism

Ihsanic Intelligence. (2005). The Hijacked Caravan: Refuting Suicide Bombings as Martyrdom Operations in Contemporary Jihad Strategy. Ihsanic Intelligence.

1	Identify the principal issue presented by the source.	The principle issues presented by this source is that Islam does not advocate for suicide bombing as martyrdom.
2	Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The author has been biased in addressing his assertion where he lays emphasis in what the Sunni says in almost the whole paper while he does not provide any idea what the Shiite side says concerning the matter. The reason is because Sunnis are majority and does not give an account of what the minority says.
3	Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The source is not ambiguous and manages to express the ideas of the author fully through support form other sources such as the Quran. Any statement mentioned is well explained and supported.
4	Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning.	I do find the Quran to be a credible source. The author has cited or quoted from the Quran to assert his point, which a credible source considering the topic is centered on Islam.
5	Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	The author has used rhetoric devices in his article to emphasize what Allah says concerning suicide. In the second paragraph in suicide subtopic, he connects several phrases with the word ‘and’.
6	Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exists, explain how you determined this.	There are no fallacies in the article. Through reading the article, one realizes that the author has not made any assumed claim, or statements that are not understandable. There are no arguments in the source or any premises without a clearly supported conclusion.
7	State one argument made by the author.	The author argues that the Quran does not support suicide bombing and it is considered murder. The author says suicide bombing does not make one a martyr. The only time one is considered a martyr is when one is killed during jihad war, which is fighting against oppression and persecution.
8	Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.	The author concludes that suicide is murder and neither is killing of children and women allowed by Allah, which suicide bombing does not recognize.
9	Is the author’s argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak? Explain how you determined this.	The author’s argument is valid and sound considering he gets the ideas from credible sources such as the Quran, which is the basis upon which suicide bombers support justify their actions. Through reading the article and analyzing where his points come from it is evident, there is validity in his argument.
10	Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this.	The author does use moral reasoning since upon reading the article, it is clear that the author is trying to drive as to believe that suicide bombing is evil and not good.

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.

[order_calculator]