valid argument structure might look something like W r i t i n g

valid argument structure might look something like W r i t i n g

find academic article that makes a normative argument related to an issue covered in class (topics see attached file) and

craft a normative (argumentative) response to that argument.

  1. You will be required to find and select an academic journal or law review article related to your chosen topic (within the broad domain of media/communication law: that is, the topics we cover in this class) and then provide a summary and critique of an argument the author makes in that article. Your submission should be approximately 1600-2000 words in length.

I recommend using the Thomson Reuters WestlawLinks to an external site. research database available through UO Libraries or Google Scholar (Links to an external site.) to locate good law review articles or peer-reviewed journal articles.

  1. After conducting research and selecting your article, you should:

Summarize the article (including theory, methods, arguments, and key findings, etc.),

Situate the article within a brief literature review of related literature (minimum two additional academic articles),

Identify and clearly present the author’s key normative argument (that is, what is one sustained argument the author is making that you find interesting and engaging?),

Provide a critical response to some aspect of the paper, preferably an argument made by the authors. To do this, you should reflect on and describe the implications that the identified argument may have on society, and craft your own counter-argument in response.

You will need to conduct legal research to identify relevant academic articles and then clearly craft and present your own normative argument. The normative (ought or should) aspect of the argument is key here, as you need to go beyond merely explaining what the law is or how it applies to the topic you’ve chosen (but you must also do this as part of your legal analysis!). You should craft your normative argument by using the best evidence (premises) that you can to make the argument as strong as possible. The argument you make to demonstrate your position should be your own (i.e., not taken directly from another source), but may be informed by the assigned readings, other academic sources, law (legal cases, statutes, other legal instruments), or current events.

You should explain the thesis of your counterargument, provide some brief background and contextual information (a paragraph or so), and craft a formal argument with premises that lead, logically, to your stated conclusion. For example, a valid argument structure might look something like:

Premise 1.  Such and so is the case.

  1. Premise 2.  This or that is true.
  2. Premise 3.  If such and so is true and this or that is true, then X is true.
  3. Conclusion.  So, it follows that X is true
  4. After presenting your (counter-)argument, you should provide a brief discussion and analysis of your premises (your evidence, reasons, etc.) and conclusion, including any cases or evidence that support your argument, and define any terms you use that might be subject to multiple meanings or interpretations.

Posted in Uncategorized