instruction
stringclasses 84
values | input
stringlengths 0
21.5k
| output
stringlengths 0
8.95k
|
|---|---|---|
The premises of an argument should be seen as sufficient if, together, they provide enough support to make it rational to draw the argument’s conclusion. If you identify more than one conclusion in the comment, try to adequately weight the sufficiency of the premises for each conclusion when judging about their “aggregate” sufficiency—unless there are particular premises or conclusions that dominate your view of the author’s argumentation. Notice that you may see premises as sufficient even though you do not personally accept all of them, i.e., sufficiency does not presuppose acceptability. How would you rate the sufficiency of the premises of the author’s argument on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Both endeavors are better to be part of.But I as an individual I would like to advance the common good in this society to become unpetty with each other,to do things way better than they use to.Everyone in this world knows what they want to be. To be alone pursuing their dreams without the help of others, but some other will help the community to make it safe and better.To teach them what they are capable of,to beleive in themselfs that they can do as the things wealthy people does. | 1 |
Segment the following review into its elementary argumentative units. Elementary argumentative units are the fundamental components of an argument. | One ear breaks after 2 days. Happened to me twice already. DO NOT BUY | One ear breaks after 2 days.
Happened to me twice already.
DO NOT BUY |
An argumentation should be seen as globally sufficient if it adequately rebuts those counter-arguments to its conclusion that can be anticipated. Notice that it is not generally clear which and how many counter-arguments can be anticipated. There may be cases where it is infeasible to rebut all such objections. Please judge about global sufficiency according to whether all main objections of an argumentation that you see are rebutted. How would you rate the global sufficiency of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Yes I do feel that the consumption of water bottles should not be allowed anywhere unless in the case of emergency. Plastic bottles can leak chemicals after a period of time. Water bottles also are almost never recycled, and end up in landfills which lead to pollution of our environment. They take 700 years to start to decompose. 90% of the cost is the bottle itself... The water is usually tap water, and is not regulated. Even if tap water is dirty, you can easily clean it out with leaves, moss, and some water cleanser. Nearly one in five tested water bottles have bacteria anyway. | 2 |
Given the following two arguments (Argument A and Argument B), determine which of the two is more convincing. | Argument A: I truly believe that wearing uniform is bad, because it is not helping to student to express his/her individuality. It is also very uncomfortable , and during winter time might very cold as well. That is why schools shouldn't force students to wear uniform.
Argument B: Kids don't want to wear the same clothes every day I know I would hate it. | Argument A |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument A is more convincing because it is more balanced, objective, discusses several points of view, well-rounded or addresses flaws in opposing views. | Argument A: An action is ethical if society as a whole would benefit if we all did it. Fair enough? <br/> If everyone had a gay marriage, then society as a whole would NOT benefit. In fact, we would all become extinct, because without one man and one woman there would be no reproduction and continuation of our species. <br/> Therefore, gay marriage can't be ethical. <br/> You can't refute my statement by saying, "There will always be straight people" because that's like saying killing someone is right because there will always be those who won't kill.
Argument B: This idea is essentially playing with semantics. <br/> I did not propose that there be a separate but identical marriage for homosexual relationships and that it be called "civil unions." <br/> "Furthermore, the effects on society are bound to be minimal..." <br/> This is the type of reasoning that the slippery slope argument applies perfectly to. Why not let any small group demand a change with little relative impact? <br/> "...why challenge any assumption?" <br/> I'm not arguing that law shouldn't change. I'm arguing that law developed under one set of assumptions should be blindly applied to a different scenario. Read my rebuttal to res0ndf7 for more on this line. | No |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument A is more convincing because it has better credibility, reliability or confidence. | Argument A: This is the most idiotic debate i have ever seen. HOW you tell me please hoe did we get so perfect were the earth and sun and moon is in the right spot and are bodys function perfectly are hands made distinctively. Cause we were made after his own image.
Argument B: I love Jesus, so I am on this side . | No |
Given the following comment-argument pair, decide which of these statements is true: The comment...
...explicitly attacks the argument.
...vaguely/implicitly attacks the argument.
...makes no use of the argument.
...vaguely/implicitly supports the argument.
...explicitly supports the argument. | Comment: Our country was founded under GOD. And under GOD should stay in the US Pledge of Allegiance.
Argument: Under God is part of American tradition and history | The comment explicitly supports the argument. |
Extract the central claim from the following argumentative text. | Playing sports together allows the family to connect as a unit. It encourages the family to undertake a healthier lifestyle. It also allows them to focus on one another instead of independent items. It fosters camaraderie with the family via shared interests and events. It can also demonstrate the benefits of working together. DOING SPORTS TOGETHER IS A GOOD THING FOR FAMILIES. | Doing sports together is a good thing for families. |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument A is more convincing because it sticks to the topic. | Argument A: Listen porn is not wrong because in schools that never give an accurate demonstration because of parents. Porn not only teaches but also gives prime examples.
Argument B: I also find it telling that there's (as of now) seven votes for "Porn is wrong", but no one is willing (able?) to say why. | No |
Given the following two argumentative discourse units (ADUs), determine whether the two ADUs are connected by any argumentative relation (e.g. support or attack). | ADU1: as they would not be able to protect themselves from their natural predators.
ADU2: Horns are the rhinos' natural protection mechanism, | No |
Does the given clause belong to an argument? | The public prosecutor and the police have a duty to investigate crimes reported to them, the former deciding whether a prosecution should be initiated, pursuant to Article 148 of the Code of Criminal Procedure | No |
An argument is emotionally deceptive if the emotions appealed to are used as deceptive tricks to win, derail, or end the discussion. Decide whether the argument is Emotionally Deceptive or Not Emotionally Deceptive | Topic: Cmv: i think kids owe their parents everything because the parents brought them into this world and gave them life and kept them fed and sheltered and relatively healthy during their childhood.:
Argument: I think kids owe their parents everything because the parents brought them into this world and gave them life and kept them fed and sheltered and relatively healthy during their childhood. Kids should stay at home (or as close to home as possible) for their entire lives, so that in case a parent has any need at all, the kids can drop what they're doing and help the parents, because they owe them their lives. I believe that kids don't know what they're doing, ever, and that parents always know better than their kids. CMV | Is Not Emotionally Deceptive |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it has no reasoning or less reasoning. | Argument A: Is porn wrong? Absolutley not!! Everyone has their own definition of morality. If you don't believe in it then don't look at it. The people who participate in it do it because they want to and they probably enjoy it. Whether your the person watching porn or participating in it, porn is a choice not a case of right or wrong.
Argument B: Listen porn is not wrong because in schools that never give an accurate demonstration because of parents. Porn not only teaches but also gives prime examples. | No |
Produce a short text that argues for or against the following debate topic. | Does recycling really make a difference? | Recycling really does make a difference because without it, there would be an abundance of paper, glass, and plastic. If we did not recycle, before long there would be nowhere to put all of the extra garbage. Recycling helps the environment by keeping non-natural things out of it. This way, animals do not accidentally eat it and get sick or die. It also helps keep plastics, which are not biodegradable, out of the environment, and from getting into our water supplies. |
Given as input an argumentative claim, potentially along with context information on the debate, rewrite the claim such that it improves in terms of text quality and/or argument quality, and preserves the meaning as far as possible. | Almost no matter their final goals, AGIs will likely develop convergent instrumental goals, like acquiring resources. The AI does not love you, nor does it hate you, but you are made of atoms it could use for something else. Adding more AIs that think this way doesn't help humanity. | Almost no matter their final goals, AGIs will likely develop convergent instrumental goals, like acquiring more resources that would put them in conflict with humanity \(and probably each other\). The AI does not love you, nor does it hate you, but you are made of atoms it could use for something else. Adding more AIs that think this way doesn't help humanity. |
A premise of an argument should be seen as acceptable if it is worthy of being believed, i.e., if you rationally think it is true or if you see no reason for not believing that it may be true. If you identify more than one premise in the comment, try to adequately weight the acceptability of each premise when judging about their “aggregate” acceptability - unless there are particular premises that dominate your view of the author’s argumentation. If you identify more than one premise in the comment, try to adequately weight the acceptability of each premise when judging about their “aggregate” acceptability—unless there are particular premises that dominate your view of the author’s argumentation. How would you rate the acceptability of the premises of the author’s argument on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Who are we to judge what is right or wrong? Can we not just let people make decisions and live with the consequences? | 2 |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is generally weak or vague. | Argument A: While striving to make advancements for the common good you can change the world forever. <br/> Allot of people have succeded in doing so. Our founding fathers, Thomas Edison, George Washington, Martin Luther King jr, and many more. These people made huge advances for the common good and they are honored for it.
Argument B: I believe its best advancing towards the common good, but it doesn't really exist in this world. Mostly everyone is greedy, selfish, only would care about what they want, and not caring about what others would want. I believe everyone have small feeling towards the common good, but most people think they are important than anyone else in the whole world. | Yes |
Label each elementary argumentative unit as REFERENCE or as one of the proposition types FACT, TESTIMONY, POLICY, and VALUE. FACT (Proposition of Non-Experiential Fact) is an objective proposition, meaning it does not leave any room for subjective interpretations or judgements. For example, “and battery life is about 8-10 hours.”. TESTIMONY (Proposition of Experiential Fact) is also an objective proposition. However, it differs from FACT in that it is experiential, i.e., it describes a personal state or experience. For example, “I own Sennheisers, Bose, Ludacris Souls, Beats, etc.”. POLICY (Proposition of Policy) is a subjective proposition that insists on a specific course of action. For example, “They need to take this product off the market until the issue is resolved.”. VALUE (Proposition of Value) is a subjective proposition that is not POLICY. It is a personal opinion or expression of feeling. For example, “They just weren’t appealing to me”. REFERENCE (Reference to a Resource) is the only non-proposition elementary unit that refers to a resource containing objective evidence. In product reviews, REFERENCE is usually a URL to another product page, image or video. Also, REFERENCE cannot be supported by other elementary units. For example, “https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/[...]”. | I love them,
there are comfortable enough that I don't hardly notice them when I don't have music playing
The play/pause button is a bit mushy and rolls around a bit, but doesn't hinder profrormance.
I love the idea of open ear headphones,
as I don't like things in my ears
and if you turn up the volume enough (75%) it will drown out most of the background noise while still letting you hear the irregular sounds.
Wold recommend for active individuals. | VALUE
VALUE
VALUE
VALUE
VALUE
TESTIMONY
VALUE |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument A is more convincing because it is clear, crisp, to the point or well written. | Argument A: Farquhar was the one that played the role of a 'mother' to Singapore.He contributed more to Singapore than Raffles supporting the fact that he was the founder of Singapore.
Argument B: Even though William had legalized gambling, he did it so that Singapore can prosper, but Raffles had turned it down, leaving Singapore alone. | No |
The argumentation can be thought of as a dialectical exchange between the role of the proponent (who is presenting and defending the central claim) and the role of the opponent (who is critically challenging the proponents claims). Given the following central claim and an argumentative discourse unit (ADU), determine the argumentative role, i.e. Proponent or Opponent of the ADU. | Central Claim: No, the horn of wild rhinos should not be removed to prevent them from being poached.
ADU: On one hand, yes I think removing rhinos' horns would be a good idea. | opp |
A small set of talking points, termed key points can be used to form a concise summary from a large collection of arguments on a given topic. Does the following key point match the given argument? | Key point: Marriage ceremonies/wedding receptions can be incredibly expensive for both attendees and hosts. The money spent on weddings could be better used elsewhere, such as towards a couple's new home, or for some charitable cause.
Argument: Marriages tie up people with unfair obligations | No |
Extract the Toulmin components (Premise, Claim, Backing, Refutation and Rebuttal) from the given argument. The output should be in the format: "Premise: <premise> --> Claim: <claim>" or "Refutation: <refutation> --> Rebuttal: <rebuttal>" or "Rebuttal: <rebuttal> --> Claim: <claim>" or "Backing: <backing>" | I don't know. Around here, there are plenty of choices, but the government only pays for public education of various types and those who can afford private schools pay for those above and beyond their property taxes that fund the public schools.
I just disagree that if public schools went away, all these wonderful educational facilities would magically spring up and everyone would be educated and the world would be a better place to be. The only reason most private schools show good numbers is because they can completely ignore all the problem students. Just getting rid of public schools isn't going to get rid of problem students and SOMEONE is going to have to deal with them. | Premise: The only reason most private schools show good numbers is because they can completely ignore all the problem students. --> Claim:
|
Distinguish, whether the comment is Persuasive regarding the discussed topic or not (Not Persusasive). The key question to answer is: Does the author intend to convince us clearly about his/her attitude or opinion towards the topic? | What she says is probably true. The more affluent parents would probably make the public school "less crappy". But, why should they be expected to submit their children to a "less crappy" school when they can have a good school. Of course, if you believe in communism, then everyone should be required to endure "less crappy" schools which would consistently degenerate into full fledged "crappy"! | Not Persuasive |
An argument is appropriate if the used language supports the creation of credibility and emotions as well as if it is proportional to its topic. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument is Appropriate or Inappropriate. | Topic: Should the gitmo really be closed down? stance: no:
Argument: I just wish my President would have specified where the 200 ish prisoners were going to go instead of Guantanomo Bay. If he had, pending where they would go, i would be more inclined to agree.
But with the waterboarding incidents that a lot of people call torture and the whole "Its Cuba's property not ours!" business alone, i think the base should stay open.
But then, what do I know? I'm only 19 and i've never been to Guantanomo so i don't know the exact happenigns of the place. I've never been in the Armed Forces or personally delt with the terroists so this opinion of mine isn't based off of much. | Inappropriate |
Score the helpfulness of the following review on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 4 (highest). | Very well constructed. I think these earbuds are above and beyond what I was expecting, especially for the price! | 1 |
An argumentation should be seen as effective if it achieves to persuade you of the author’s stance on the discussed issue or—in case you already agreed with the stance before—if it corroborates your agreement with the stance. Besides the actual arguments, also take into consideration the credibility and the emotional force of the argumentation. Decide in dubio pro reo, i.e., if you have no doubt about the correctness of the author’s arguments, then do not judge him or her to be not effective—unless you explicitly think that the arguments do not support the author’s stance. How would you rate the effectiveness of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | You don't know these girl's/women's stories, who are you to judge what they can or can't do? Until you've walked a mile in these girl's/women's shoes, than you may have the opportunity to speak on their behalf. Until then, you may not have to like it and may stand firm with your opinion, but at least have the audacity to respect other's opinions on the subject matter. | 1 |
The style of an argumentation should be seen as appropriate if the used language supports the creation of credibility and emotions as well as if it is proportional to the discussed issue. The choice of words and the grammatical complexity should, in your view, appear suitable for the discussed issue within the given setting (online debate forum on a given issue), matching with how credibility and emotions are created via the content of the argumentation. How would you rate the appropriateness of the style of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Murder under any circumstance is not right. A person who commits the act knows the consequences, and they know that they are guilty. I wouldn't be able to look at my spouse the same ever again. I would not be able to live with the secret of a murder. <br/> So yea, i would turn them in. | 2 |
An argument has excessive intensity if the emotions appealed to by are unnecessarily strong for the discussed issue. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument has Excessive Intensity or Does Not Have Excessive Intensity | Topic: Abortion: right or wrong? stance: it's right:
Argument: 2 reasons:
- Let all babies be wanted babies. Knowing that you were unwanted but the parent was prohibited from getting an abortion can be pretty emotionally devastating to some.
- Anyone who doesn't want their baby so much as to have them terminated would not be a good parent. If they could care less about their child, the kid will grow up uncared for and possibly even abused, malnourished, or neglected.
Here's my solution: once you find out you're pregnant (unintentionally), immediately look for an adopter, and if that fails, get an abortion. | Does Not Have Excessive Intensity |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is off topic or doesn't address the issue. | Argument A: Ah yes, the classic peppered moth argument <br/> I'm very familiar with it <br/> I'm not sure how that proves the evolutionary process <br/> Both moth colors have always been there <br/> Its just a matter of which is it easier for their prey to see. That's not evolution- <br/> That's a diet plan
Argument B: k, I believe that 'God' created and then tweaked via evolution? <br/> we all find out within 100 years anyways.... | Yes |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is attacking, abusive or disrespectful. | Argument A: This not only degrades morality, it also affects how women are treated in society today. This is against women empowerment in a sense that women are viewed merely as sex toys. Which at the end of the day affects how men perceive women which will in turn lead to a lot of disrespect and false perception. <br/> Now, how about crime rates? Murders, Rape, and Sexual Abuse. According to studies, all these people who committed these grave crimes all had one thing in common: PORN.
Argument B: Is porn good for ur health ?No it isnot opponents say that porn doont have a serious effects on health. however studies have shown that porn and practice it can damage ur health slowly especially ur immune system . sooner or later thos who do porn in thier relationships definitely they donot have good health as others . here is a key question . somke is bad for u . somkers feel good when they smoke but smoke 100% leads to thier death and porn have the same influence on the health <br/> i think that smoke is better than porn in facr both of them are extremely bad for u | No |
Label each elementary argumentative unit as REFERENCE or as one of the proposition types FACT, TESTIMONY, POLICY, and VALUE. FACT (Proposition of Non-Experiential Fact) is an objective proposition, meaning it does not leave any room for subjective interpretations or judgements. For example, “and battery life is about 8-10 hours.”. TESTIMONY (Proposition of Experiential Fact) is also an objective proposition. However, it differs from FACT in that it is experiential, i.e., it describes a personal state or experience. For example, “I own Sennheisers, Bose, Ludacris Souls, Beats, etc.”. POLICY (Proposition of Policy) is a subjective proposition that insists on a specific course of action. For example, “They need to take this product off the market until the issue is resolved.”. VALUE (Proposition of Value) is a subjective proposition that is not POLICY. It is a personal opinion or expression of feeling. For example, “They just weren’t appealing to me”. REFERENCE (Reference to a Resource) is the only non-proposition elementary unit that refers to a resource containing objective evidence. In product reviews, REFERENCE is usually a URL to another product page, image or video. Also, REFERENCE cannot be supported by other elementary units. For example, “https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/[...]”. | Excellent product...
Use it with my phantom 3 controller
Perfect length,
no xtra cord hanging | VALUE
TESTIMONY
VALUE
FACT |
Argument strength refers to the strength of the argument an essay makes for its thesis. An essay with a high argument strength score presents a strong argument for its thesis and would convince most readers. Score the argument strength of the given argumentative essay using the following scoring range:
1.0 (essay does not make an argument or it is often unclear what the argument is)
1.5
2.0 (essay makes a weak argument for its thesis or sometimes even argues against it)
2.5
3.0 (essay makes a decent argument for its thesis and could convince some readers)
3.5
4.0 (essay makes a strong argument for its thesis and would convince most readers) | "Bloody hostage-taking: three prisoners escape, one guard is killed". Everyday we hear and watch about violent events, about people who have been agressed at home or in the street .
As a matter of fact, violence is dangerously becoming more and more frequent and even common: as a whole, it is no longer surprising, although it is still shocking, to see a young defensiveless boy beaten by several hooligans...
This problem of social violence can be seen through two aspects: the prevention and the repression. Nowadays our society is putting the stress on prevention in order to limit as much as possible the wave of attacks in our cities: severe controls of identity (when its is legally possible), surrounding and following of groups at risk like the young delinquants, the social misfits... But the civilians and the authorities are extremely powerless in the face of such violent behaviours and the means they have at their disposal, (financial as well as physical (number of available force to assure protection or to carry out controls, for instance)) are far less sufficient. In some cases of attacks it was impossible to forecast such behaviours and thus no special measures could be be taken. I allude here to the case of a young mentally disabled who lethally hurt a young boy .
Although people knew about his mental trouble, the young disabled could not be previously put into prison, because he had done nothing reprehensible yet. But then the question rose (like it is much too often the case): does a child have to be killed before the police positively act? This example is given here to illustrate the complexity of the prevention .
The other aspect is that of the repression, adopted by most societies. But here again it is far from being so clear .
Let us imagine the world of the prison as a separate unity with its own rules, values, and its own code of honour. The small criminal who enters this world has to adapt himself to these rules. As long as he remains in prison, he will get very limited contact with the outside world. When he will be released, his situation will be very painful because he will have, alone, to re-adapt and re-integrate himself in a society he has been excluded from. Moreover he will have the greatest difficulties of integration because of his past as a prisoner .
People are suspicious, they do not want to get involved with anybody who once did something reprehensible or simply who spent some time in prison. No wonder that those ex-prisoners feel injustly rejected and remain social misfits with all the consequences of this (feeling of injustice, wish for revenge, latent violence, deliquancy...).
The increase of violence gives birth to tow major concerns: the increasing number of people in the prisons and the people's lack of comprehension to the prisoners' problematic situation (during and after their imprisonment).
It is publicly known that prisons are overcrowded, new prisons are built but it is not sufficient. So several men have to live in a limited space. They get in touch with other criminals who may be more dangerous. The resentment towards society may be exacerbated because of the lack of privacy together with the loss of freedom and a deep wish for revenge .
But this aspect of things is very complex: on one hand, nobody can know for sure whether a criminal who has spent his time in prison, is really freeable and able to re-integrate society; on the other hand, he has paid for what he had done and cannot be legally kept in jail any longer. The measures Minister of Justice Mr Wathelet has taken in that respect mean a step forwards when he makes it possible to maintain a criminal who is legally freeable but still potentially dangerous, in a special institution - a kind of intermediate stage - for a period that is determined by a judge .
As a conclusion, we can see that, although there is some progress, very much has to be done for the reintegration of the ex-prisoners in the society. But first of all, the mentality of our societies has to change and to be more tolerant towards those people who have once failed but who have paid for that. Because we have no right to refuse them to chance of a new start .
| 2.5 |
Argument conclusions are valid if they follow from the premise, meaning a logical inference links the premise to the conclusion. Is the conclusion valid? | Premise: We can do that using the leverage of aid to induce democracy.
Conclusion: We have to be on the side of the Pakistani people. | No |
A premise of an argument should be seen as relevant if it contributes to the acceptance or rejection of the argument’s conclusion, i.e., if you think it is worthy of being considered as a reason, evidence, or similar regarding the conclusion. If you identify more than one premise in the comment, try to adequately weight the relevance of each premise when judging about their “aggregate” relevance—unless there are particular premises that dominate your view of the author’s argumentation. You should be open to see a premise as relevant even if it does not match your own stance on the issue. How would you rate the relevance of the premises of the author’s argument on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Easy access to porn may be the reason there has been an 85 percent decline in rapes over the last 25 years, according to a law professor at Northwestern University. | 3 |
An argument should be seen as cogent if it has individually acceptable premises that are relevant to the argument’s conclusion and that are sufficient to draw the conclusion. Try to adequately weight your judgments about local acceptability, local relevance, and local sufficiency when judging about cogency—unless there is a particular dimension among these that dominates your view of an argument. Accordingly, if you identify more than one argument, try to adequately weight the cogency of each argument when judging about their “aggregate” cogency—unless there is a particular argument that dominates your view of the author’s argumentation. How would you rate the cogency of the author’s argument on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Even if there was a valid proof for the existence of god, there would be no valid proof that that god is Christian or not. | 1 |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument A is more convincing because it sticks to the topic. | Argument A: If one is in a relationship then yes porn is wrong. No one has the right to tell others what to do, we can only hope to influence. Porn is disgusting. Seriously. It exploits men and women. It is not realistic and can split up relationships. <br/> If a man and a woman or a woman and a woman or man and a man are in a relationship then they should not need any other forms of sexual gratification other than their spouse. Out of love. And respect.
Argument B: Even though humans have sexual desires, it doesn't mean people you don't even know should watch you in pornographic content. Have sexual desires to the one you love. | Yes |
An argument is inappropriate if it contains severe orthographic errors or for reasons that are not Toxic Emotions, Missing Commitment or Missing Intelligibility. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument is Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons or Not Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons | Topic: What is the law for the poor contnry >i,e, india?:
Argument: i knw its a cliche' but NO OFFENSE TO U!!!.....
u 'think' that india is poor,,,but its not,,,,,,,,,its quite rich in history, evrything~........... if u think its poor it stays poor,,,,,,,,but if u can write better english,more ppl get jobs,,and lo-behold! india Bcomes rich! | Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons |
Argument strength refers to the strength of the argument an essay makes for its thesis. An essay with a high argument strength score presents a strong argument for its thesis and would convince most readers. Score the argument strength of the given argumentative essay using the following scoring range:
1.0 (essay does not make an argument or it is often unclear what the argument is)
1.5
2.0 (essay makes a weak argument for its thesis or sometimes even argues against it)
2.5
3.0 (essay makes a decent argument for its thesis and could convince some readers)
3.5
4.0 (essay makes a strong argument for its thesis and would convince most readers) | It's well know that out modern world is dominated by science, technology and industrialisation .
Nowadays in our societies there are lot of kinds of people, I mean, people from all ages. And here es where we can notice the effects of the progress on the imagination capacity of the population in our world, specially at early ages .
Old people doesn't spend time in dreaming but in remembering their lives, when they are children, youngers or even when they were middle-aged people. That's when the elder population used to imagine other situation, other life. That were moments of wars, disaster, poverty and the science technology was in an investigation step. Television didn't exist .
Middle-aged people are still thinking about new changes but they know that it's very dificult to break with all their habits. In their childhood, television started to work but it was too much expensive to get a t.v. set for most of the families and these children grew without this monster of the telecomunication .
People in their late twenties or thirties try to combine the reality and the fantasy. They are enough young to dream and enough old to realice on what's on their hands. At their early ages, television was lead by the people who had just discovered this powerful mass-media and at those moments most of the programs were still interesting .
About the young people and children, there are two kinds of them, those who are not very influenced by television and those who are .
The former are problably the people with the biggest capacity of dreaming and inventing of this population. There's no doubt they can based their original ideas in something they have seen before, for instance, in television but they have their brains in a continous development .
The latter have their minds completely atrophied and this can't permit fly their imagination, they only can think about the fights, wars, bombs, sex, and similar things that they watch in the telly. We can argue that television have interesting programs for educate children too, and that's true. But the problem is that our younger people spend hours and hours in front of the t.v. set watching films and scenes less recomended for them. This is one of the causes of the rising figures of violence in our societies all around the world .
In my opinion the key to solve this problem is the base, in the basic education at schools and over all, in the upbringing at homes. Alternatives to this waste of time, are sports, reading, relationship with other people, and so on .
| 2.0 |
The edges representing arguments are those that connect argumentative discourse units (ADUs). The scheme distinguishes between supporting and attacking relations. Supporting relations are normal support and support by example. Attacking relations are rebutting attacks (directed against another node, challenging the acceptability of the corresponding claim) and undercutting attacks (directed against another relation, challenging the argumentative inference from the source to the target of the relation). Finally, additional premises of relations with more than one premise are represented by additional source relations. Given the following two argumentative discourse units, determine the function of the segment, i.e. support, support by example, rebutting attack, undercutting attack, or additional premise. | ADU1: They can live without their horns if it is done correctly.
ADU2: Rhinos are becoming extinct. | additional premise |
Given an argument consisting of a claim and a reason, select the correct warrant that explains reasoning of this particular argument. There are only two options given and only one answer is correct. | Topic: Should the U.S. Work With Assad to Fight ISIS?
Additional Info: Is the militant group such a threat to the United States that working with the despised Syrian dictator would be in the national interest?
Claim: The U.S. should work with Assad to fight ISIS
Reason: The US should work with all of the countries that are fighting ISIS.
Warrant 1: Assad is not running a legitimate country
Warrant 2: Assad is running a country as legitimate as any | Assad is running a country as legitimate as any |
Argument conclusions are valid if they follow from the premise, meaning a logical inference links the premise to the conclusion. Given the conclusions below: Is conclusion A better than conclusion B in terms of validity? | Premise: Bear in mind also the lessons of history: social insurance programs tend to start out highly imperfect and incomplete, but get better and more comprehensive as the years go by. Thus Social Security originally had huge gaps in coverage — and a majority of African-Americans, in particular, fell through those gaps. But it was improved over time, and it’s now the bedrock of retirement stability for the vast majority of Americans.
Conclusion A: Democracy not possible in Iraq, so why stay?
Conclusion B: US health insurance reform has improved over time | No |
You are given the following question, stance (Yes vs. No) towards this question and a type of reasoning (logos vs. pathos). Your task is to form a persuasive argument toward the question that supports the given stance based on the following type of reasoning | Question: Should Germany introduce the death penalty?
Stance: No
Reasoning: Emotional reasoning (pathos-oriented) | As tempting as it may seem, Germany should by no means introduce capital punishment . Yes, many people think that a murderer has already decided on the life or death of another person , but morally no one can claim the right to rule over the life or death of another human being . a death would not be of any more use to those affected and their relatives than if the felon receives a long sentence . |
An argumentation should be seen as reasonable if it contributes to the resolution of the given issue in a sufficient way that is acceptable to everyone from the expected target audience. Try to adequately weight your judgments about global acceptability, global relevance, and global sufficiency when judging about reasonableness—unless there is a particular dimension among these that dominates your view of the author’s argumentation. In doubt, give more credit to global acceptability and global relevance than to global sufficiency due to the limited feasibility of the latter. How would you rate the reasonableness of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | You can actually see evolution happen. Fruit Flies are quite useful for this experiment since the breed, live, and die so quickly. You have to understand evolution happens because of mutations and they survive because those mutations have made it easier for the creature to survive then the others. ie. natural selection. Speciation is also an example of evolution... different species come about because they have adapted to a slightly different enviroment. If you look you can see evolution | 2 |
An argument is inappropriate if it contains severe orthographic errors or for reasons that are not Toxic Emotions, Missing Commitment or Missing Intelligibility. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument is Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons or Not Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons | Topic: Tv is better than books:
Argument: Well, Books is better than T.V. because T.V. makes you eyes bad is kills imagination dead! Read 'Television' by Roald Dhal you'll know it all!!! :) :) :) :) | Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons |
Given an argumentative claim, select the type required type of quality improvement from the defined set (Typo/grammar correction, Clarification, Link correction/addition) that should be improved when revising the claim. | According to investigators, they did not audio or video record this accusers' interview where she formally made the allegations against Holtzclaw. Recording interviews is standard procedure. | Link correction/addition |
Given the following comment-argument pair, decide which of these statements is true: The comment...
...explicitly attacks the argument.
...vaguely/implicitly attacks the argument.
...makes no use of the argument.
...vaguely/implicitly supports the argument.
...explicitly supports the argument. | Comment: No, because this country has a sepration of church and state, and it violates the rights of the people who are of a religion that doesn't worship god, or for agnostic, Atheists, and freethinkers into conforming to ways that they can't comply to, and shouldn't have to, because people tell them to. Speaking as an Atheist, I say that people shouldn't put that in, because it is imposing a point of view that I shouldn't have to be forced to believe in. After all, isn't that the reason the pilgrims escaped from England? It is also imposing religion, which is wrong.
Argument: Removing under god would promote religious tolerance | The comment explicitly supports the argument. |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is unclear, or hard to follow. | Argument A: books are better than TV because most of the TV kids watch add influences to them which are not good and most parents don't care what there children watch and I thank book are better because you learn more from books.
Argument B: Television is almost the exact same thing as books, the only difference is, you actually have to move your eyes for books | Yes |
Produce a short text that argues for or against the following debate topic. | Can composting help save the environment? | Composting helps the natural environment and aids in organic farming. Composting helps the environment by reducing the amount of waste households produce and turning it into natural compost. Composting helps the environment. One drawback of composting is that not all material is beneficial to the environment. Some materials when composted damage plant life. However much household waste is encouraged to be composted. Composting is a good way to reduce your household waste and be environmentally friendly. |
The argumentation can be thought of as a dialectical exchange between the role of the proponent (who is presenting and defending the central claim) and the role of the opponent (who is critically challenging the proponents claims). Given the following central claim and an argumentative discourse unit (ADU), determine the argumentative role, i.e. Proponent or Opponent of the ADU. | Central Claim: Composting can be very beneficial for our environment.
ADU: and can, but not always, produce an odor. | opp |
Given the following two arguments (Argument A and Argument B), determine which of the two is more convincing. | Argument A: all this debate proves is that the internet is full of conceded, stuck up, narcissistic, atheists who are totally bigoted and intolerant of other peoples beliefs and cant leave people alone to worship or not worship as they chose athieists are biggots plain and simple
Argument B: Christianity, because I always root for the underdog. The membership of the atheist here is way bigger. Just look at the congregations of both. | Argument B |
Does the given clause belong to an argument? | As regards the applicant's complaints concerning the decisions of the courts in the criminal proceedings, the Commission recalls that, in accordance with Article 19 (Art. 19) of the Convention, its only task is to ensure the observance of the obligations undertaken by the
Parties in the Convention | Yes |
Extract the Toulmin components (Premise, Claim, Backing, Refutation and Rebuttal) from the given argument. The output should be in the format: "Premise: <premise> --> Claim: <claim>" or "Refutation: <refutation> --> Rebuttal: <rebuttal>" or "Rebuttal: <rebuttal> --> Claim: <claim>" or "Backing: <backing>" | Hi Carol
This is such sound advise and thank goodness there are Head Teachers like yourself out there!!
My Son has complex needs and starts mainstream in September and it makes me angry when I hear Parents like Joanne having such a struggle to find a place for their Child
I agree too, that although labels are scary for Parents, with them, the Children do get more benefits and support, so can be a positive thing
Fran | Premise: I agree too, that although labels are scary for Parents, with them, the Children do get more benefits and support, so can be a positive thing --> Claim:
Backing: My Son has complex needs and starts mainstream in September
|
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is only opinion, or a rant. | Argument A: What I meant was that in the situation, both moths were present at the time of the observation - both colored moths were on the trees to begin with... <br/> "Then the darkness was selected for when the environment changed during the Industrial Revolution." <br/> -Who selects this mutation to occur? Does it just happen by good fortune?
Argument B: k, I believe that 'God' created and then tweaked via evolution? <br/> we all find out within 100 years anyways.... | Yes |
Score the helpfulness of the following review on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 4 (highest). | Love these!!! The sound quality is extremely good. I like the comfortable fit in my ears. I highly recommend it! | 0 |
Produce a short text that argues for or against the following debate topic. | Are teenage marriages a good idea? | Teenage marriages are not a good idea. Teenage years are critical for brain development. It is proven that brains are not fully developed into well into the early twenties. Teens are still children and are not ready for responsibility that marriages bring. There is no harm in waiting a few years. |
An argument has toxic emotions if the emotions appealed to are deceptive or their intensities do not provide room for critical evaluation of the topic by the reader. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument is Toxic or Not Toxic. | Topic: Legal advice needed?:
Argument: Look, this is what you need to do! Try and get the money.
The hospital bills can be paid in full by the hospitals billing department, all you need to do is put a statement in writing stating you can not pay the bill and most hospitals have to clear the account. Thats most hospitals,,,not all will. But its worth it.
If you have no means to pay for it, then you dont.
My father just passed away and he had not a potty to even use,
and I thought once I went to the showing they would try and get me..well they didnt, cause most states (if u look into it more) will grant you so much to lay them in the ground. My state here in Ohio gave my father $6000.00 for his..they have to do something with the funds for tax write off reasons. So call Leagle Aide in your state and see what they tell you. | Not Toxic |
Predict the stance (pro, con, or unknown) of the user on the corresponding big issue from the text of the claim. | Its a myth There are a set of advantages and a set of disadvantages for every group -- men , women , blacks , whites , Asians , Muslims , Christians ect . Some groups have more disadvantages than other groups . I think whites have less disadvantages than other racial groups but still , we have disadvantages . 5 % of whites in America owned slaves yet we are all collectively blamed for slavery . Hate crimes and racism against us is ignored . We face systemic racism in the form of affirmative action . We are assumed to be racist and we have to go out of our way to prove that we 're not , and even than we still are called racist . When we try to talk about the problems we face we are called whiny and silenced . The disadvantages one faces in life , regarding class , health , disability , social life , family and other things can override the advantages one gets from being white . Who cares if you are less likely to be pulled over by police when your son has cancer ? At the same time the disadvantages one gets from being a minority can be overridden by advantages they get from being rich , able bodied and healthy . Who would you rather be ? A homeless paraplegic veteran with post traumatic stress disorder or a rich black woman ? | unknown |
Given two arguments on a topic, decide whether they are on the same side or not. | Argument 1: it is better to regret not having a child than regret having one
Argument 2: a woman's rights are not the only rights that need to be respected in abortion: | Not the same side |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument A is more convincing because it is clear, crisp, to the point or well written. | Argument A: Here's a story for you from a few years back. A nine year old girl living in poverty in South America was raped by her step dad, and got pregnant with twins. Her family knew that she would die in childbirth, but she was not allowed to get an abortion because they were devout catholics. Both her and her two children died. That's three lives lost. One of those lives actually knew what life was.
Argument B: In the United States of America, pro-choice is the only constitutional way to go. Elsewhere in the world, people will do whatever they want. | No |
Given a controversial topic and a set of beliefs, generate an argumentative claim tailored to the beliefs. | Topic: should kids have homework over winter break?
Beliefs:
Abortion: Undecided
Affirmative Action: Undecided
Animal Rights: Undecided
Barack Obama: Undecided
Border Fence: Pro
Capitalism: Undecided
Civil Unions: Undecided
Death Penalty: No Opinion
Drug Legalization: Con
Electoral College: Undecided
Environmental Protection: Pro
Estate Tax: Pro
European Union: Undecided
Euthanasia: Con
Federal Reserve: Undecided
Flat Tax: Con
Free Trade: Undecided
Gay Marriage: Con
Global Warming Exists: Con
Globalization: Undecided
Gold Standard: Undecided
Gun Rights: Pro
Homeschooling: Undecided
Internet Censorship: Undecided
Iran-Iraq War: No Opinion
Labor Union: Undecided
Legalized Prostitution: Undecided
Medicaid & Medicare: Pro
Medical Marijuana: Con
Military Intervention: Undecided
Minimum Wage: Con
National Health Care: Pro
National Retail Sales Tax: Undecided
Occupy Movement: Undecided
Progressive Tax: Undecided
Racial Profiling: Undecided
Redistribution: Undecided
Smoking Ban: Con
Social Programs: Pro
Social Security: Pro
Socialism: Undecided
Stimulus Spending: Undecided
Term Limits: Undecided
Torture: Undecided
United Nations: Pro
War in Afghanistan: Undecided
War on Terror: Pro
Welfare: No Opinion | Students should have homework over winter break . For clarification , i 'm going to assume that homework will primarily be referring to things such as projects ; that is , demonstrations , essays , presentations , etc . In addition , i 'm assuming he 's referring to High School students , and not Uni+++ students . Students should have homework over winter break for the following reasons ; 1 . It keeps their scholarly mind active . During long breaks , students without homework tend to not participate in mentally demanding activities ; such as listening to music , spending time with family , and having time in good cheer . While this is necessary to relax for a strong emotional health , the mental health can not be ignored . Most projects can be completed within the time frame with ease , as well as leave plenty of time for merrymaking . These projects will keep students using their mind over the break , making the adjustment back into the school schedule easier and ensure their brain keeps up to par . 2 . It can help teachers get what needs to be taught , taught As most people are aware , teachers are required to teach a certain curriculum during the year . This load typically keeps the teacher constantly busy , and meeting the deadline can be difficult , especially when teachers spend extra time on certain lessons that are difficult . By assigning a project , a teacher can displace that workload and ensure they can better teach students when they return , basically giving them more of a cushion for time . We all acknowledge that students all learn differently , and by creating time so there is n't a demand to move on and leave students confuse , academia ultimately benefits . 3 . It can help keep students out of trouble Some students may find themselves getting into trouble because of the excessive amounts of free time . As it has been say , `` Idle hands are the devil 's playthings '' . This basically amounts to , `` If you are n't doing something , the chance of you doing something bad increases . '' Because winter break can be stressful from financial and other factors , this stress can also increase the odds of acting in a negative way . By assigning a project , it can keep the student busy , out of trouble , and maybe help keep their mind off of stress . All in all , students can achieve the CON 's goal through the AFF 's plan , and in addition will keep their mind busy , keep out of trouble , and even benefit educators to help them be better educators . I look forward to my opponent 's rebuttal . |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it provides no facts, not enough support, not credible evidence or no clear explanation. | Argument A: India is a secular state.people of all communities reside here so india has the knowledge of almost all countries and the way they live. so it can easily lead all the people of world without creating any nuissance among anyone.
Argument B: india can speak english better than orginal english man..britishers and americans speech includes a lot of grammatical mistakes ..so who is better....indians !!!! "truth is stranger than fiction"....... | No |
An argumentation should be seen as globally acceptable if everyone from the expected target audience would accept both the consideration of the stated arguments within the discussion of the given issue and the way they are stated. Notice that you may see an argumentation as globally acceptable even though the stated arguments do not persuade you of the author’s stance. How would you rate the global acceptability of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | while yes phys. ed. classes should still be in high schools they shouldnt be mandatory(especially not all 4 years of HS). maybe just having PE be an optional class and having one year be a mandatory thing instead of a continuous PE class. in lower grades, yes it should be mandatory because little kids are more likely to gain and lose weight in weird patterns. That Is All. | 1 |
An argumentation should be seen as reasonable if it contributes to the resolution of the given issue in a sufficient way that is acceptable to everyone from the expected target audience. Try to adequately weight your judgments about global acceptability, global relevance, and global sufficiency when judging about reasonableness—unless there is a particular dimension among these that dominates your view of the author’s argumentation. In doubt, give more credit to global acceptability and global relevance than to global sufficiency due to the limited feasibility of the latter. How would you rate the reasonableness of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | jarman: <br/> porn is wrong because it sholud be in 4-D with surround sound and special effects :) it would make it much more pleasurable btw im a girl........ | 1 |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is non-sense, has no logical sense or is confusing. | Argument A: Christianity does offer hope in the world. Christianity does tell others to help the poor.
Argument B: False Dichotomy. <br/> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br/> I would also like to point that atheism predates Christianity, destroying your "test of time" argument (which was bullshit to begin with- argumentum ad populum). In fact, by definition, atheism predates religion. | No |
An argumentation should be seen as well-arranged if it presents the given issue, the composed arguments, and its conclusion in the right order. Usually, the general issue and the particularly discussed topics should be clear before arguing and concluding about them. Notice, however, that other orderings may be used on purpose and may still be suitable to achieve persuasion. Besides, notice that, within the given setting (online debate forum on a given issue), some parts may be clear (e.g., the issue) and thus left implicit. How would you rate the arrangement of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Firefox takes the best of all previous browsers and sticks it all in one neat package. Security and extendibility are some of its top features. And those times when FF seems to eat up a lot of memory? That's just the cache so you're able to surf the net even faster. Just lower the cache if you don't want to eat so much memory. | 2 |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is attacking, abusive or disrespectful. | Argument A: An action is ethical if society as a whole would benefit if we all did it. Fair enough? <br/> If everyone had a gay marriage, then society as a whole would NOT benefit. In fact, we would all become extinct, because without one man and one woman there would be no reproduction and continuation of our species. <br/> Therefore, gay marriage can't be ethical. <br/> You can't refute my statement by saying, "There will always be straight people" because that's like saying killing someone is right because there will always be those who won't kill.
Argument B: Of course its wrong. <br/> Why do you think Aids exists? | Yes |
Label each elementary argumentative unit as REFERENCE or as one of the proposition types FACT, TESTIMONY, POLICY, and VALUE. FACT (Proposition of Non-Experiential Fact) is an objective proposition, meaning it does not leave any room for subjective interpretations or judgements. For example, “and battery life is about 8-10 hours.”. TESTIMONY (Proposition of Experiential Fact) is also an objective proposition. However, it differs from FACT in that it is experiential, i.e., it describes a personal state or experience. For example, “I own Sennheisers, Bose, Ludacris Souls, Beats, etc.”. POLICY (Proposition of Policy) is a subjective proposition that insists on a specific course of action. For example, “They need to take this product off the market until the issue is resolved.”. VALUE (Proposition of Value) is a subjective proposition that is not POLICY. It is a personal opinion or expression of feeling. For example, “They just weren’t appealing to me”. REFERENCE (Reference to a Resource) is the only non-proposition elementary unit that refers to a resource containing objective evidence. In product reviews, REFERENCE is usually a URL to another product page, image or video. Also, REFERENCE cannot be supported by other elementary units. For example, “https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/[...]”. | Best earphones I've tried,
very very good sound all around,
not the greatest bass.
Noise is blocked for good.
Both earbuds show sign of rust
and the fine transparent protective layer has come off.
I take extremely care of them, always leave them in their pouch and never have used them for excercise.
This is unacceptable after only 6 months. | VALUE
VALUE
VALUE
VALUE
TESTIMONY
TESTIMONY
TESTIMONY
VALUE |
An argument is unclassified if it is inappropriate because of reasons not covered by Detrimental Orthography, Toxic Emotions, Missing Commitment and Missing Intelligibility. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument is Unclassified or Not Unclassified | Topic: Is it better to have a lousy father or to be fatherless:
Argument: I think in any case its better to have no father then to have a lousy father either way you still lose. When you have a father you want him to be the best he can be so you can learn from him as you grow up. If you were to have a lousy father then whats the point of having a father at all if he's just going to be lousy and he wouldn't teach you anything. It's always better to have a respectable father figure in your life then to have a lousy father figure. | Is Unclassified |
Predict the stance (pro, con, or unknown) of the user on the corresponding big issue from the text of the claim. | No , Marijuana should not be legal . I 'm assuming this round is for acceptance . I look forward to your points . | pro |
Given the following two arguments (Argument A and Argument B), determine which of the two is more convincing. | Argument A: Although Farquhar was said to be the one who stayed in Singapore to support its development, Raffles provided the planning, the strategizing, and was the one to select Singapore as another British base, giving early Singapore support of the British. If William Farquhar was to be proclaimed the founder because he did the "grunt work", shouldn't the supervisor of a construction site get the most commission, instead of the contractor? And besides, Raffles left Singapore under the orders of his superiors and he did not leave of free will
Argument B: No.If you research about FarQuhar.He didn't do anything to help Singapore while Raffles was away,instead of doing anything he just made a big mess and allowed things like vice,crimes and gambling dens carry on. | Argument A |
Identify the reasons in the given argumentative text. | So, are you suggesting that if woman became pregnant accidentally, she should go through with that pregnancy just to hand it over to someone else? Isn't that a bit dangerous for both of them? | Reason 0: if woman became pregnant accidentally, she should go through with that pregnancy just to hand it over to someone else? |
An argument is inappropriate if it contains severe orthographic errors or for reasons that are not Toxic Emotions, Missing Commitment or Missing Intelligibility. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument is Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons or Not Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons | Topic: Is the school uniform a good or bad idea:
Argument: school uniform does no harm to students life emotions now as for the point of expressing oneself imagine one bully wearing shirt,tie,pant all neatly ironed and well polished shoes wont he look good.remember dressing sense also is a part of ur interveiw | Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons |
Is the following argument clause a premise? | Not every aspect of private life automatically qualifies for protection under the Convention | Yes |
The premises of an argument should be seen as sufficient if, together, they provide enough support to make it rational to draw the argument’s conclusion. If you identify more than one conclusion in the comment, try to adequately weight the sufficiency of the premises for each conclusion when judging about their “aggregate” sufficiency—unless there are particular premises or conclusions that dominate your view of the author’s argumentation. Notice that you may see premises as sufficient even though you do not personally accept all of them, i.e., sufficiency does not presuppose acceptability. How would you rate the sufficiency of the premises of the author’s argument on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | i thik thier bad because i think ushould be free with out nobody telling u wat to do | 1 |
What kind of support relation, if any, exists from elementary unit X for a proposition Y of the same argument? Differentiate between REASON, EVIDENCE and NO SUPPORT RELATION. Support relations in this scheme are two prevalent ways in which propositions are supported in practical argumentation: REASON and EVIDENCE. The former can support either objective or subjective propositions, whereas the latter can only support objective propositions. That is, you cannot prove that a subjective proposition is true with a piece of evidence. REASON: For an elementary unit X to be a REASON for a proposition Y, it must provide a reason or a justification for Y. For example, “The only issue I have is that the volume starts to degrade a little bit after about six“and I find I have to buy a new pair every year or so.”(Y). EVIDENCE: For an elementary unit X to be EVIDENCE for a proposition Y, it must prove that Y is true. For example, “https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/[...]”(X) and “The product arrived damage[d],”(Y). | Argument: I have owned a pair of these for over 7 years. While they have gone through exterior damage from the passage of time, the sound quality is still phenomenal. Over time the cord did become an issue because it was so long - it would develop tension and sort of bundle up on itself. I had spent about $150.00 for these when they were brand new. I maybe spent ~10-15.00 total over time on the adapter jack for the connection since I frequently used these on my computer where I required a 3.5mm input. All in all, I just upgraded to a more modern pair of Sennheisers. I'm not selling my pair of HD555's, but considering a used pair is only $40.00 atm I would definitely recommend them to anyone who was on a budget
Elementary unit X: it would develop tension and sort of bundle up on itself.
Proposition Y: I had spent about $150.00 for these when they were brand new. | NO SUPPORT RELATION |
An argument has confusing reasoning if its components (claims and premises) seem not to be connected logically. Decide whether the argument has Confusing Reasoning or Does Not Have Confusing Reasoning | Topic: Pro choice vs pro life:
Argument: You are mixing topics thereby creating fallacy in your argument. The debate is not to determine under what circumstances may murder be morally acceptable, rather, the legal (some may say moral) foundation on which one can state that an individual has the right to terminate pregnancy.
In addition, you may want to brush up on your etymology and vary your sources rather than simply paraphrasing definitions that fit your point of view. | Does Not Have Confusing Reasoning |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is generally weak or vague. | Argument A: books is well better than tv because it is cheaper to buy a book <br/> if you wanted to buy a tv it would be really dear and you have to buy a tv licence <br/> books can help you learn <br/> a lot of the stuff on tv is either violent or not right for kids <br/> so books are well better
Argument B: TV is terrible. Except for Spongebob maybe. That's an alright show. Still, the majority of television is awful. So I'd have to say books based on that. | Yes |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument A is more convincing because it has more details, information, facts, examples, reasons, better arguments, goes deeper or is more specific. | Argument A: God is abstract. He doesn't often show himself. In general, the idea of a god or gods is pretty hard to think about. <br/> Apes are concrete. You can see them. Generally, the whole ape concept is easy to get your hands around. <br/> It's funny that the supposedly unsophisticated ancients would all choose to believe in an abstract concept rather than a concrete one. If you asked Adam where he came from, why would he say "God must have created me, I've seen Him around the garden" instead of "I was magically transformed from one of those apes over there"?
Argument B: Ah yes, the classic peppered moth argument <br/> I'm very familiar with it <br/> I'm not sure how that proves the evolutionary process <br/> Both moth colors have always been there <br/> Its just a matter of which is it easier for their prey to see. That's not evolution- <br/> That's a diet plan | No |
Segment the following review into its elementary argumentative units. Elementary argumentative units are the fundamental components of an argument. | perfectly well rounded headphones. everything works like its supposed to. I didn't even know they had a mic in them which was a huge plus when i found out. i can be a good distance from my phone while playing music. definitely a steal for the $50 right now. my only and highly upsetting complaint is that my headphones ended up breaking while i was removing it from my head. So the material its made of couldve been alot better and more forgiving. | perfectly well rounded headphones.
everything works like its supposed to.
I didn't even know they had a mic in them which was a huge plus when i found out.
i can be a good distance from my phone while playing music.
definitely a steal for the $50 right now.
my only and highly upsetting complaint is that my headphones ended up breaking while i was removing it from my head.
So the material its made of couldve been alot better and more forgiving. |
Predict the stance (pro, con, or unknown) of the user on the corresponding big issue from the text of the claim. | Abortion results in the death of an innocent human being and can not be justified . As such it should be made illegal . | pro |
An argument is appropriate if the used language supports the creation of credibility and emotions as well as if it is proportional to its topic. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument is Appropriate or Inappropriate. | Topic: Firefox vs internet explorer:
Argument: Hell, I'm using Firefox right now. Plus Firefox makes searching the internet relatively easier than using internet explore. | Appropriate |
Is the following argument clause an argument conclusion? | which makes
it an offence to drive a motor vehicle whilst unfit to drive through
drink. | Yes |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is attacking, abusive or disrespectful. | Argument A: I am a christian. The bible says plain out that homosexuality is wrong. Call me pathetic, weak, or whatever you want to call me, but I know for sure that the bible is the TRUTH, the WHOLE truth, and the ONLY truth.
Argument B: Of course its wrong. <br/> Why do you think Aids exists? | Yes |
An enthymeme is defined here as any missing argumentative discourse unit (ADU) that would complete the logic of a written argument. Is there a problematic enthymematic gap at the position marked with "<mask>" in the following argument? | The point I want to draw your attention is to deal with the reasons. I claim that shouting at students, discouraging or taking precautions are no good. <mask> Talking with students individually about the reasons give students the impression of being noticed. Therefore. They'll think about your relation and try to give it you. When you discover the reasons, it'll be easier to find the solutions. Then the students at colleges will realize it and probably stop it since they think it is inappropriate for their identity . | No |
An argumentation should be seen as successful in creating credibility if it conveys arguments and other information in a way that makes the author worthy of credence, e.g., by indicating the honesty of the author or by revealing the author’s knowledge or expertise regarding the discussed issue. It should be seen as not successful if rather the opposite holds. Decide in dubio pro reo, i.e., if you have no doubt about the author’s credibility, then do not judge him or her to be not credible. How would you rate the success of the author’s argumentation in creating credibility on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | I believe it is better to have a lousy father than to have none. It is important to have a role model to look up to and without that figure, you might become lost in the world. A lousy father is not that bad because what exactly makes a lousy father, always working and not having time for you. A father that isn't always around is no reason to prefer to have no father. Growing up and seeing the way your father is, makes you want to become like him or gives you the motivation to surpass him and become even better than he is. | 2 |
An argument is missing relevance if it does not discuss the issue, but derails the discussion implicitly towards a related issue or shifts completely towards a different issue. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument Lacks Relevance or Does Not Lack Relevance | Topic: Hot, steamy, trailer rockin' sex!!!!?:
Argument: Oh damnit, a political question, I was tricked. I think the main problem with the trust issue is mainly due to the iffy criminal justice system. In order for law to work it must be swift, severe, and gauranteed: People sit on death row for 15 years, child rapists have been released with simple probations for treatment and no punishment, and you can commit the same crime in 2 places, one gets you probation and the other gets you 20 years. I believe that until these issues are better delt with, people will not be able to believe that our justice system is efficient enough to "correct" anyone. Unfortunately our justice system is unique in the world, it is a system that would literally let 10 guilty people go than send one innocent person to jail, which I can't argue with, but hopefully in the future people will realize that it's a mess and someone will fix it. | Lacks Relevance |
An argument is missing seriousness if it is either trolling others by suggesting (explicitly or implicitly) that the issue is not worthy of being discussed or does not contribute meaningfully to the discussion. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument Lacks Seriousness or Does Not Lack Seriousness | Topic: Pro choice vs pro life:
Argument: we did not create the baby, we are not the ones who gave it life, why should we be the ones who put it to death, we have no authority to do such a thing. | Does Not Lack Seriousness |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it has language issues, bad grammar, uses humor, jokes or sarcasm. | Argument A: The growth in bottled water production has increased water extraction in areas near bottling plants, leading to water shortages that affect nearby consumers and farmers. In addition to the millions of gallons of water used in the plastic-making process, two gallons of water are wasted in the purification process for every gallon that goes into the bottles.
Argument B: Sheep count him to fall asleep. <br/> he won the 1995 world series of poker using uno cards. | No |
Is the following argument clause an argument conclusion? | The Commission refers to its above findings that under Austrian
law, the applicant could have brought criminal charges against the
police officers concerned, or filed a civil action for compensation as
regards the alleged detrimental consequences of the events for her
health. | No |
Label each elementary argumentative unit as REFERENCE or as one of the proposition types FACT, TESTIMONY, POLICY, and VALUE. FACT (Proposition of Non-Experiential Fact) is an objective proposition, meaning it does not leave any room for subjective interpretations or judgements. For example, “and battery life is about 8-10 hours.”. TESTIMONY (Proposition of Experiential Fact) is also an objective proposition. However, it differs from FACT in that it is experiential, i.e., it describes a personal state or experience. For example, “I own Sennheisers, Bose, Ludacris Souls, Beats, etc.”. POLICY (Proposition of Policy) is a subjective proposition that insists on a specific course of action. For example, “They need to take this product off the market until the issue is resolved.”. VALUE (Proposition of Value) is a subjective proposition that is not POLICY. It is a personal opinion or expression of feeling. For example, “They just weren’t appealing to me”. REFERENCE (Reference to a Resource) is the only non-proposition elementary unit that refers to a resource containing objective evidence. In product reviews, REFERENCE is usually a URL to another product page, image or video. Also, REFERENCE cannot be supported by other elementary units. For example, “https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/[...]”. | They are perfect for my 5 year old granddaughter.
No more cords to break.
That is where the problem was with the other headphones we bought.
These turn off by themselves if the movies goes off (not right away but within a few minutes)
I love them, will be ordering more for my other grandchildren. :) | VALUE
TESTIMONY
TESTIMONY
FACT
VALUE |
The style of an argumentation should be seen as appropriate if the used language supports the creation of credibility and emotions as well as if it is proportional to the discussed issue. The choice of words and the grammatical complexity should, in your view, appear suitable for the discussed issue within the given setting (online debate forum on a given issue), matching with how credibility and emotions are created via the content of the argumentation. How would you rate the appropriateness of the style of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | I think common good is better than personal pursuit because it's always better to assist other people. When people help each other out its more likely that everything comes out great. You get to become a role model by helping some one that needs your help. Yes personal pursuit is important when you are thinking of going to college. But than you got to think about leaving legacy behind by teaching other what you know. So the learning or society process can advance. So therefore you let others take it to the next level. | 2 |
An argumentation should be seen as effective if it achieves to persuade you of the author’s stance on the discussed issue or—in case you already agreed with the stance before—if it corroborates your agreement with the stance. Besides the actual arguments, also take into consideration the credibility and the emotional force of the argumentation. Decide in dubio pro reo, i.e., if you have no doubt about the correctness of the author’s arguments, then do not judge him or her to be not effective—unless you explicitly think that the arguments do not support the author’s stance. How would you rate the effectiveness of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | India is a secular state.people of all communities reside here so india has the knowledge of almost all countries and the way they live. so it can easily lead all the people of world without creating any nuissance among anyone. | 1 |
An argument is not intelligible if its meaning is unclear or irrelevant to the topic or if its reasoning is not understandable. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument Lacks Intelligibility or Does Not Lack Intelligibility | Topic: Will you agree if your government wants to apply a regulation about porns and sexuality?:
Argument: The federal government has no delegated power to make laws concerning clothing except in those geographical areas under direct federal control. States and localities have power to make such laws within their jurisdictions. By and large such laws reflect local perceptions of decency and civility.
During the last 30 or so years the existence of such laws and the application of such laws have significantly loosened. For example, most people no longer formally dress to go to church or to dine out. Society has come to respect (some refer to it as political correctness) those who wish to dress differently. For those who do dress differently they should be realistic in their degree of difference by not anticipating a warm acceptance of some style and this is particularly true when dress reflects sexual mores. | Lacks Intelligibility |
Does the given clause belong to an argument? | impossibility of suing the Inspectors or the Secretary
of State in the civil courts for defamation because they would have had
a defence of absolute or qualified privilege | Yes |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it uses irrelevant reasons or irrelevant information. | Argument A: I really don't know because i think it depends on who she murdered and how it happened. If it was self defense then no I wouldn't tell the police, but if she just went crazy and murdered someone then yes i would tell the police.
Argument B: I wouldnt turn her in becuase she is my wife. She made a mistake that we can get over it. If she trusted me by telling me what she did then I couldn't do that to her. | No |
Given a controversial topic and a set of beliefs, generate an argumentative claim tailored to the beliefs. | Topic: resoved: not all property is capital
Beliefs:
Abortion: Con
Affirmative Action: Con
Animal Rights: No Opinion
Barack Obama: Con
Border Fence: Pro
Capitalism: Pro
Civil Unions: Con
Death Penalty: Pro
Drug Legalization: Pro
Electoral College: Pro
Environmental Protection: No Opinion
Estate Tax: Con
European Union: Con
Euthanasia: No Opinion
Federal Reserve: Pro
Flat Tax: Pro
Free Trade: Pro
Gay Marriage: No Opinion
Global Warming Exists: Con
Globalization: Undecided
Gold Standard: Con
Gun Rights: Pro
Homeschooling: Pro
Internet Censorship: Con
Iran-Iraq War: Pro
Labor Union: Con
Legalized Prostitution: Pro
Medicaid & Medicare: Con
Medical Marijuana: Pro
Military Intervention: Con
Minimum Wage: Con
National Health Care: Con
National Retail Sales Tax: Pro
Occupy Movement: Con
Progressive Tax: Con
Racial Profiling: Con
Redistribution: Con
Smoking Ban: Con
Social Programs: Con
Social Security: Con
Socialism: Con
Stimulus Spending: Con
Term Limits: Pro
Torture: Undecided
United Nations: Con
War in Afghanistan: Pro
War on Terror: Pro
Welfare: Con | Interesting topic . I 'm looking forward to seeing where this debate leads . Thanks to my opponent for instigation , and I wholeheartedly look forward to this round . |
Distinguish, whether the comment is Persuasive regarding the discussed topic or not (Not Persusasive). The key question to answer is: Does the author intend to convince us clearly about his/her attitude or opinion towards the topic? | Can't take that chance with those I hold the dearest to me. Just like I find the best area to raise my kids, so it is where they are educated. | Not Persuasive |
An argumentation should be seen as globally sufficient if it adequately rebuts those counter-arguments to its conclusion that can be anticipated. Notice that it is not generally clear which and how many counter-arguments can be anticipated. There may be cases where it is infeasible to rebut all such objections. Please judge about global sufficiency according to whether all main objections of an argumentation that you see are rebutted. How would you rate the global sufficiency of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | I would rather be "fatherless" then having a "lousy father", because a "father" is supposed to be the man of the house and set a good example so the rest of the family can look up to him. So if I look up at a lousy father I might then be a lousy person, but if I had no father then I'll set the standards for my own self and step up and be the man of the house especially if I had younger brothers or sisters. | 2 |
Consider the two arguments below (Argument A and Argument B). Would you agree with the following statement?Argument B is less convincing because it is unclear, or hard to follow. | Argument A: I am a christian. The bible says plain out that homosexuality is wrong. Call me pathetic, weak, or whatever you want to call me, but I know for sure that the bible is the TRUTH, the WHOLE truth, and the ONLY truth.
Argument B: gays are overrated. it is another "look at me" stunt. i think gays are the product of overly protective parents, abuse, or liberal wakoness (it should be a disease). <br/> if you gays would stop calling attention to yourselves, nobody would really care what you do. | No |
Produce a short text that argues for or against the following debate topic. | Is nuclear energy really safe? | Nuclear energy has been proven time and time again to be safe. It has been proven, over six decades, to have a minimal impact on the environment, as they emit almost no greenhouse gases. The chances of anything untoward happening to a nuclear facility are also slim. There have been a few nuclear events since Chernobyl, but there have been relatively few fatalities associated with it. |
Subsets and Splits