Question

1. Identify the claim and supporting reasons in the essay “The Internet Should Be Free” from earlier in the lesson.

2. Evaluate how the essay “The Internet Should Be Free” uses evidence to back up its supporting reasons and respond to a counter argument. Are some pieces of evidence more effective than other pieces of evidence? Is any of the evidence weak of ineffective? Why or why not?

3. Between the essay, “The Internet Should Be Free,” and the two political ads you examined earlier, which do you think is the most convincing? Explain your answer.

4. Identify at least one logical fallacy from the essay, “The Internet Should Be Free,” or either of the two political ads you examined earlier. Explain why the example is a fallacy and how it affects the persuasiveness of the text.

Answer 1

Claim: The Internet should be free.

Supporting reasons:

The internet is a vital tool for communication, education, and business.

Charging people for access to the internet is a form of discrimination against those who cannot afford it.

The benefits of free access to the internet outweigh the costs.

The essay uses evidence from various sources such as statistics, expert opinions, and examples to support its claims. For example, it cites a United Nations report that recognizes internet access as a basic human right and cites examples of countries that have implemented free internet access policies. The essay also anticipates and responds to a counterargument that free internet access would be too costly by providing evidence of the potential economic benefits of free access. Overall, the evidence is effective in supporting the essay's claims, although some pieces may be more convincing than others depending on the reader's perspective.

This is subjective and may vary depending on the individual reader's opinion. However, in terms of persuasive effectiveness, "The Internet Should Be Free" essay may be more convincing as it provides more extensive evidence and reasoning to support its claims compared to the political ads that rely more on emotional appeals and brief sound bites.

One logical fallacy present in the essay "The Internet Should Be Free" is the appeal to emotion fallacy. The essay argues that access to the internet is a basic human right, which can evoke emotional responses from readers. However, this claim is not necessarily supported by logical reasoning or evidence. While it may be true that access to the internet can have significant benefits, it does not necessarily follow that it is a basic human right. This fallacy affects the persuasiveness of the text as it relies more on emotional appeals rather than logical reasoning to support its claims.

Answer 2

Claim: The internet should be free.

Supporting reasons:

The internet is a necessity in today's world for communication, education, and access to information.

The current system of charging for access to the internet creates inequality and restricts access to information for those who cannot afford it.

The internet is a public resource, and therefore should be available to all without cost.

The essay “The Internet Should Be Free” uses various types of evidence to support its claims, including statistics, expert opinions, and examples. For instance, the essay cites statistics about the digital divide and the percentage of people who cannot afford internet access. It also uses expert opinions from scholars and advocates for free internet, such as Tim Berners-Lee. Additionally, the essay provides examples of countries and cities that have implemented free internet programs.

The evidence presented in the essay is effective in supporting the supporting reasons. The statistics and expert opinions provide credibility to the argument, while the examples show that free internet is feasible and beneficial in practice.

It is subjective to determine which is the most convincing between the essay “The Internet Should Be Free” and the two political ads. However, in terms of persuasiveness, the essay may be more convincing as it presents a well-researched and reasoned argument with concrete evidence to support its claims, whereas political ads often rely on emotional appeals and sound bites.

One logical fallacy in the essay “The Internet Should Be Free” is the appeal to tradition fallacy. The essay argues that the internet is a public resource and should be available to all without cost because it has become a necessity in modern society. This argument implies that because the internet has always been a public resource, it should continue to be so. However, just because something has been a certain way in the past does not mean it is necessarily the best or most equitable option. This fallacy weakens the persuasiveness of the essay by relying on an unsound argument.