Stand Up While You Read This, Essay Example

As for the overall argumentative thesis on this article, it is worth saying that the author draws our attention to the need to finally understand the importance of active living; the thing is that once people are characterized by sitting “most of the rest of the day”, they are likely to suffer from numerous diseases, including a widespread obesity, heart attacks, etc. Concerning the sub-claims of the article, it becomes apparent that Olivia Judson is focused on clarifying the contemporary concept of human awareness of weight gain that she considers as absolutely inappropriate in the light of modern-day society. Obviously, the evidence that supports the abovementioned claims is credible and logical; it is necessary to make mention that the author utilizes generally recognized approaches to interpreting the issue of passive lifestyle, which is inevitably harmful in many ways. Moreover, the evidence is accurate and complete, as well. Olivia Judson offers the experiment aimed at proving a shift from the active living to passive is likely to deteriorate people’s health. Obviously, the article does not incorporate the unwarranted assertions; considering the logical fallacies, it was hard to distinguish any. As a result, the major argument is definitely convincing, since the readers are offered quite an informative piece of writing that one cannot but regard as really conclusive.

“Nuclear Is Not Answer” by Alyssa Woudstra

The overall argumentative claim of the essay is that nuclear power should not be considered as the “…best for the environment.” even though there is a number of distinct advantages; apparently, apart from the variety of benefits that one can take from nuclear power, it is worth taking into consideration the risks, which definitely outweigh the profits. As for the sub-claim of the essay, the author pays attention to fossil fuels as much friendlier to environment in comparison with nuclear power. It is clear that the evidence that supports the claims is credible and logical, since the author utilizes quite reliable sources. The evidence is obviously accurate and complete; moreover, it is relevant and appealing. The facts that the author incorporates in the paper, including a nuclear accident at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, appear to be trustworthy and with no signs of unwarranted suggestions. As for the logical fallacies, it is necessary to admit that the paper contains quite a logically designed structure. Evidently, the paper encloses counterarguments that rebut claims from other side of argument; for instance, the author mentions that despite the fact that using fossil fuels is also potentially dangerous to some extent, there are still “…advantages over nuclear energy.” The argument is definitely convincing, since the author provides different angles of interpreting the issue of energy production.

“Is It Now a Crime to Be Poor” by Barbara Ehrenreich

As for the overall argumentative thesis of the article, the author makes mention that nowadays being poor guarantees the arrest. As for the sub-claims, the author draws attention to paradoxes that the authorities produce while issuing an inaccurate policy of enforcing rule of law. The evidence that supports the claims is obviously credible andlogical, since Barbara Ehrenreich offers concise cases of arresting people for practically being homeless. Moreover, the comments of those arrested for nothing emerge to convince the readers of that the paper makes sense. The evidence is accurate and relevant; the author takes a view of the inadequate attitudes of the officials towards the principles of keeping public order. Obviously, the paper does not contain the unwarranted assumptions as well as logical fallacies. On the other hand, it is important to mention that there are no counterarguments that rebut claims from the other side of the argument. All in all, the argument is indisputably persuasive and while moving through the text, it becomes clear that the time to modify the approach to treating homeless and needy people has come; apparently, putting them to jail is not likely to improve crime situation in the cities.

As for the overall argumentative thesis of this essay, it is worth saying that the author advances an argument about the negative impact of zero-tolerance programs and approaches. The thing is that the statistics proves that adoption of this approach has not reduced the amount of “targeted offences”. As for the sub-claims that Malcolm Gladwell makes mention of in his essay, one cannot but encounter the fact that the author aims to show the significance of rethinking the fallacies that people are likely to make; the point is that absolving from blame appears to be much more beneficial in comparison with just “enforcing the law”. The evidence is definitely accurate and relevant, since the author produces the arguments that one cannot but consider as absolutely trustworthy; Robert Oppenheimer’s case is inevitably authoritative example of why zero-tolerance should not be practices. The essay does not incorporate some unwarranted assertions; all the assertions are thoroughly defined. It is also necessary to admit that there are no logical fallacies. The paper includes the counterarguments that rebut claims from the other side of this argument; and it makes this argument convincing, since various viewpoints help the readers clearly understand the point.

 “No Mercy” by Malcolm Gladwell

Considering the essay “No Mercy” by Malcolm Gladwell, it is necessary to admit that the author draws attention to a modern-day burning issues that many of us are likely to currently collide with. The thing is that zero-tolerance, based on “firm and unambiguous punishments” can hardly deter “…bad behavior at all.”; a peculiar characteristic of the discussion essay lies in that the author produces a number of trustworthy arguments, giving evidence to why it is necessary to eradicate this newly-designed governance policy. Analyzing the given paper, it becomes apparent that each individual is prone to making a lot of mistakes; yet, these mistakes usually serve a lesson, and one should take it into consideration. In accordance with Tennessee study, a zero-tolerance program cannot reorganize human awareness of bad behavior; quite the opposite, such an approach to dealing with the signs of unfair practice is likely to deprive people of their willingness to expand horizon within particular field of activity.

The author’s arguments with regards to recent culture of probation statuses convince of the need to remove this stereotypical practice of fighting against person’s offenses. Rhett Bomars’ case of being “…cut from the team when he was found to have been “overpaid” at his job at a car dealership.” is a great example of the “age of zero-tolerance”. Apart from this case, the author produces some more, including a physicist’s “apple with noxious chemicals” and teenagers who make mistakes due to just being teenagers. As a result, a variety of cases in regard to the era of probation statuses gives an opportunity to make conclusion that skipping with zero-tolerance approach occurs as more appropriate. The author analyzes the modern-day culture of treating the unfairness on the basis of sufficiently credible and logic judgments; the ideas are logically connected and gradually brings up to making a final conclusion. Moving through the text, it is possible to unveil the societal context of a zero-tolerance issue. In order to reach out to the readers, the author utilized the technique of incorporating reliable information. Obviously, the controversies within the area of regarding the unfair practice entail a variety of questions. However, this controversy shows all the palpability of the discussion item.