This assignment draws on Chapter 2 of Social Problems (Best 2017) to analyze the rhetoric associated with the condition you have chosen. First, you will choose one claimsmaker group and analyze a specific claims made by the group. Then, you will identify and analyze opponents of the claim.
The objective of this assignment is to develop familiarity in applying the concepts related to claims: grounds, warrants, and conclusions. You will also evaluate the expected opponent(s) and audience of a claim.
You will gain familiarity identifying when a group is making an argument. You will also be able to identify the grounds and warrants for their argument.
First, you will analyze a particular claim made by an activist claimsmaking group. Choose an activist claimsmaker group from your annotated bibliography that you would like to focus on. The self-description of the claimsmaking group may portray them in a variety of ways: as those who have been personal victims of a social problem, as highly motivated champions and protectors of those suffering from a social problem, as effective participants who get results and make a difference, as liberals or progressives or conservatives, as religious or nonreligious, as citizens or patriots, as the voice of the common people, and so on. Examining the self-description of the claimsmaking group will help you identify what types of grounds the group uses to describe the condition.
Identify a claim from your group about the condition you have chosen.
Identify the claim’s grounds, warrants, and conclusions. Employ the terminology we are learning in class. (For example, do the claim’s grounds include typifying examples, names, and statistics? How are they are used more and less effectively?)
Analyze how the claim might fare in the social problems marketplace. What might make it more appealing to certain audiences?
Make at least 2 suggestions for how one of the claims can be modified to make it more effective. Include any cultural resources the claimsmakers might draw on. (Be sure to add any new sources you use for this assignment to your annotated bibliography.)
As you examine the self-description of the group, note statements about other groups that are seen as friends or allies. On websites, this usually appears in the form of links to other sites. You should include some of these in your discussion. (For instance, Ralph Nader’s Public Citizen Website might have a link to the site of an environmental group such as the Natural Resources Defense Fund.)
After considering the self-description of the advocacy group and its stated identification with other friends and allies, you should look at statements describing opponents of the group. What terms are applied to those on the other side of the issue? Are they portrayed as selfish interest groups, extreme conservatives or extreme liberals, irrational advocates unable to accept the plain truth, hypocrites, ineffective advocates who don’t get results, front groups for other vested interests, unscientific groups, religious extremists or irreligious people who do not respect the sacred, and so on? Select some quotations from the materials you find as your evidence, in order to demonstrate how the group portrays its opponents.
Make a new page of your website titled “Activist Claims” for this assignment.
The two sections of the assignment should be clearly separated using headings.
Your analysis should be approximately 500-750 words.
Strong assignments will:
Use evidence to back up your arguments;
Clearly explain using plain language; and
Draw a conclusion based on evidence.