instruction
stringclasses 84
values | input
stringlengths 0
21.5k
| output
stringlengths 0
8.95k
|
|---|---|---|
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: Is an Attack on Syria Justified?
Additional Info: Should the United States and its allies launch air strikes against Syria in response to the Assad regime's reported use of chemical weapons?
Claim: US should not attack Syria
Reason: An attack on Syria would worsen things.
Warrant 1: we do not need to really make things bad for them
Warrant 2: we need to really make things bad for them | we do not need to really make things bad for them |
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)? | We talk about how schools destroy creativity and uniforms are a classic example of that destruction. In most schools with uniforms the students are given the occasional day to were their casual clothes but are then given strict guidelines as to what is acceptable. This is effectively turning "casual clothes" into a twisted "causal" uniform. | 2 |
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 there be a cap on rent increases for a change of tenant?
Stance: Yes
Reasoning: Logical reasoning (logos-oriented) | rent prices should be limited by a cap when there's a change of tenant . clearly the landlord has to pay for some repairs before a new lease . surely these costs could be covered by a minimal increase in rent over the course of the entire lease . Moreover, the tenants can plan for a maximum rent increase . |
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? | Let's discuss a viewpoint. <mask> Schools are one of the places where children and adolescents learn most about the rules, and values of the society. The children meet the other ones who are coming from different social classes, different family backgrounds, and ethnic backgrounds. Therefore, all these social backgrounds help the children to develop and establish broader and more balanced interaction with their environment. It is at school that the young people cooperate and interact with other people not because the school might expect them to, but the reason of they are being together . | No |
An argument has unclear meaning if its content is vague, ambiguous, or implicit, such that it remains unclear what is being said about the issue (it could also be an unrelated issue). Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument has Unclear Meaning or Does Not Have Unclear Meaning | Topic: William farquhar ought to be honoured as the rightful founder of singapore:
Argument: William Farquhar was removed from his position by Raffles because Farquhar had grown too close to the people. However, knowing the people well is necessary to help Farquhar solve the problems faced by the people. | Does Not Have Unclear Meaning |
Argument conclusions are novel when they contain novel premise-related content and/or combination of the content in the premises in a way that goes beyond what is stated in the premise. Given the conclusions below: Is conclusion A better than conclusion B in terms of novelty? | Premise: Since the U.S. has the largest military in the world, in addition to the most economic might, its material strength justifies its autonomy. Withdrawing from the U.N. could allow America to exercise its influence outside the realm of the U.N.'s unnecessary constraint.
Conclusion A: The United States has the most material power in the world.
Conclusion B: The U.S. is justified in escaping U.N. restrictions. | 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: It increases a sense of family togetherness,
ADU2: and with the permission of your doctor, sports are always a good thing. | No |
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? | <mask> For example, the history of the English or the structure of this language is teached theoretically to the students who study in English department. But it is not teached them how they can use or how they can teach this information the primary schools students. In addition to this speaking lessons and native lecturers are very important to develop the speech ability. But there is fact that most of the English departments students do not have any speak speaker or lecturer in their university and they do not enough speaking lessons. Many problems like these are seen in every department and university. The main reason of those problems is deficiency of the lecturer or possibilities. These problems should be solved and it should be given more importance to these subjects . | 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 generally weak or vague. | Argument A: To be able to have a succeful trading port you must have good contacts with many people and raffles had those contacts without him we would not have a trading port at all! I would like to mention that raffles had all the important qualities of a founder and he was in good position to do so. He invested a lot and we therefore credit him as our founder! We say Obama is the "founder" of health reform WHY because he was in such a high position and he could do something like invest money time and effort in such a project.
Argument B: Raffles established local magistrate in Singapore.This local magistrate led to activities such as public gambling and slavery to be controlled Farquar protected Singapore from the Dutch attacks and attracted traders to Singapore while Raffles was away. | No |
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: Actually the government does tell women what they can and can't do with their bodies <br/> It's illegal to commit suicide <br/> If a person is caught trying to hack themselves to peices they could be placed in a mental institute <br/> So the government actually does limit what a woman can do with her body
Argument B: No matter what circumstance a woman is in SHE got herself pregnant! When rape occurs why is it the poor, defenceless baby who gets no choice and dies? The baby is innocent, yes it wasnt the mothers fault but why is she more important than a child? <br/> Women have become selfish where there bodies are concerned. They believe they have the right to get pregnant and then get rid of the baby because they feel like it and made a mistake. These are childrens lives we are talking about | Yes |
An argumentation should be seen as globally relevant if it contributes to the resolution of the given issue, i.e., if it provides arguments and/or other information that help to arrive at an ultimate conclusion regarding the discussed issue. You should be open to see an argumentation as relevant even if it does not your match your stance on the issue. Rather, the question is whether the provided arguments and information are worthy of being considered within the discussion of the issue. How would you rate the global relevance of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Yes definately i will turn him in to the police because he has commited a murder and its a sin. Maybe if he gets arrested,he can feel guilty for what he has done and try not to repeat it again. And also how can i trust a murderer?He can even be telling a lie to me and maybe can kill me for someone else in the future.so Just by confiding to me does not make him clean and innocent. | 2 |
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. | Humans are able to regulate the number of animals on the planet at wish, the reverse is not true and thus a unit of human live is more worh than that of an animal since it cannot be changed as easily. | Typo or grammar correction |
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: no, spanking is not the solution to your problems... <br/> u should talk to the kid with love and understanding, for them to be able to understand they are doing wrong..
Argument B: I think parents should not spank because there's other way to make them behave. | No |
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: There's no concrete evidence that supports that god exists. <br/> Religion and the bible have too many contradictions and changes that I become less and less convinced in his existence... <br/> Evolution makes more sense to me. <br/> Animals adapt to their environment, and over huge amounts of time will evolve <br/> to be able to survive through different climates and situations.
Argument B: There is not God. I just use him in my arguments to make sarcastic comments. Sorry. | Yes |
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: Should physical education be mandatory in schools:
Argument: schools should have PE because the school i attend only has pe for middle school not high school we are a middle and a high school combined. because the lack of physical education in our high school many students are out of shape and have developed many bad non active habits and as our first year in sports our sports athletes have shown how hard it is to perform simple pre season conditioning and they quote "if we had PE conditions would be easier and would have made conditioning simple" the lack of exercise had caused them to only accomplish only 3 push-ups! | Is Not Emotionally Deceptive |
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/[...]”. | Very nice product.
They have rubber ear inserts that fit very well and are not uncomfortable at all.
They also include a few different sizes of the rubber
so you can find a size that fits your ear.
The cord is nice and light but seems durable and will hold up over time.
The color is really nice as well.
I have used them to talk hands free
and no one has had a problem hearing me
and I can hear the other caller just fine.
I really like these headphones.
I am using them on my iPhone 6s
and they work and fit great. | VALUE
VALUE
TESTIMONY
TESTIMONY
VALUE
VALUE
TESTIMONY
TESTIMONY
VALUE
VALUE
TESTIMONY
VALUE |
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)? | Christianity of course. Can't imagine life if I didn't believe in God. Actually I can, it would be hell. | 1 |
How would you rate the overall quality of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | 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. | 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 has no reasoning or less reasoning. | Argument A: Americans spend billions on bottled water every year. Banning their sale would greatly hurt an already struggling economy. In addition to the actual sale of water bottles, the plastics that they are made out of, and the advertising on both the bottles and packaging are also big business. In addition to this, compostable waters bottle are also coming onto the market, these can be used instead of plastics to eliminate that detriment. Moreover, bottled water not only has a cleaner safety record than municipal water, but it easier to trace when a potential health risk does occur. <br/> (http://www.friendsjournal.org/bottled-water) (http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/bottled/)
Argument B: AS long as people recycle the evironment, the water bottles are thrown and poluted. Its not the water companies fault. | 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 is more balanced, objective, discusses several points of view, well-rounded or addresses flaws in opposing views. | 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: Porn is wrong when it is not done in moderation. Porn addicts turn out to have intimacy issues in their relationships and mistreat and view women in a negative manner. Also people who are addicted to porn, expect all women to look like porn stars and act like porn stars, when in reality that is not what sex is about... But it tends to screw up their reality. | Yes |
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: We bought these for a plane ride & my 3-yr-old loved them! I was worried about convincing him to wear headphones, but these were so comfy it was a breeze.
Elementary unit X: & my 3-yr-old loved them!
Proposition Y: it was a breeze. | REASON |
Argument conclusions are novel when they contain novel premise-related content and/or combination of the content in the premises in a way that goes beyond what is stated in the premise. Is the conclusion novel? | Premise: Republicans will surely be emboldened by the way Mr. Obama keeps folding in the face of their threats. He surrendered last December, extending all the Bush tax cuts; he surrendered in the spring when they threatened to shut down the government; and he has now surrendered on a grand scale to raw extortion over the debt ceiling. Maybe it’s just me, but I see a pattern here.
Conclusion: Surrender on debt deal emboldens GOP to continue extorting. | 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 sticks to the topic. | Argument A: i think, the india is not ready to lead the world because of many reasons.. <br/> 1.) the politians of our country are involved in black money cases. they try to gain or earn money as possible. <br/> 2.) they always try to make a big issue of useless topics. e.g., if a politian says something about another politian, they try to make it a big issue .
Argument B: India has Strong Military Neighbors (China & Pakistan)...India has bad relation with Pakistan as they have territorial disputes and also fought 4 wars for this... and as far as china , India relation also become tense with china...due rise of territorial disputes and India interference in Pakistan....as Pakistan China has long term plans ....for example Pak China Economic Corridor and Gawadar Mega Oil City.... | Yes |
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: Evolution vs creation:
Argument: God is abstract. He doesn't often show himself. In general, the idea of a god or gods is pretty hard to think about.
Apes are concrete. You can see them. Generally, the whole ape concept is easy to get your hands around.
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"? | Has 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 has no reasoning or less reasoning. | Argument A: I think TV is better if you are watching an informational channel and it is better than books because you can switch to different informational channels an search documentaries on different subjects and when you are done learning and ready to relax you can switch to a funny show or what ever you want to watch.
Argument B: tv is better than book dathu ihfej tijkjdrk xtklp09 guil09 sfjiiytg dh,lut457 p[];o;l | Yes |
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)? | Do we have the potential? <br/> Yes. <br/> The only competition we have is China who has done a much better job for the long run. <br/> But then again the way India runs.. it always makes order out of chaos. | 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 has language issues, bad grammar, uses humor, jokes or sarcasm. | Argument A: The scientific rigor you mention is not present in evolutionary theory. Here's one example: In the 1800s, Charles Lyell and others came up with dates for the rock strata. Radiometric dating wasn't invented until the 1900s. When it was invented, the techniques were calibrated to match the dates Lyell came up with. To say that this proves the dates that Lyell came up with is a logical fallacy, and it sure doesn't sound like true scientific rigor to me.
Argument B: 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? | No |
An argument has unclear meaning if its content is vague, ambiguous, or implicit, such that it remains unclear what is being said about the issue (it could also be an unrelated issue). Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument has Unclear Meaning or Does Not Have Unclear Meaning | Topic: Human growth and development should parents use spanking as an option to discipline:
Argument: Spanking children will bad for their development. We always teach children not to hurt others, but we do it on our children . It is not make sense. | Does Not Have Unclear Meaning |
Segment the following review into its elementary argumentative units. Elementary argumentative units are the fundamental components of an argument. | These earphones are perfect for a gift to be used for private listening to music on the computer or cell phone. All so can be used to talk on the phone. To someone while they are doing something. I received these at a discount or free for my honest opinion. | These earphones are perfect for a gift to be used for private listening to music on the computer or cell phone.
All so can be used to talk on the phone. To someone while they are doing something.
I received these at a discount or free for my honest opinion. |
Argument conclusions are novel when they contain novel premise-related content and/or combination of the content in the premises in a way that goes beyond what is stated in the premise. Given the conclusions below: Is conclusion A better than conclusion B in terms of novelty? | Premise: A reform in the system of UN military missions is necessary. The peacekeeping forces in the status quo take too long to activate, and are often short of expectations. They rely too much on each country's individual situation and promises, which makes the system unstable. This has led to failures in Central Africa, Bosnia, Sierra Leone and Somalia. A UN standing army would be permanently available, stable, and have quick reactions to crises, which will lead to quick solvency.
Conclusion A: UN peacekeeping forces are often too ineffective
Conclusion B: A UN standing army would be a necessary reform. | They are equally novel |
Extract the central claim from the following argumentative text. | Removing rhinos' horns humanely will save their lives. Rhinos are becoming extinct. Poachers kill the rhinos with no regard. They can live without their horns if it is done correctly. | Removing rhinos' horns humanely will save their lives. |
An argument has unclear meaning if its content is vague, ambiguous, or implicit, such that it remains unclear what is being said about the issue (it could also be an unrelated issue). Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument has Unclear Meaning or Does Not Have Unclear Meaning | Topic: Can cops search my home with 14yr old permisson home alone?:
Argument: No. Cops need the permission of the owner of the house to search it without a warrant or reasonable suspicion that someone's life was in danger.
Edit: I wanted to add that it is disturbing how many people are saying your brother could let the police in. It is completely illegal. How could any reasonable person think that a 14 year-old, clearly not an adult, could have authority to consent? | Does Not Have Unclear Meaning |
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) | The world in which we live is dominated by science technology and industrialisation, things which have improved our life, in fact today we can count on more services than man did before. If on the one hand progress is positive because it has bettered the conditions of man's life, on the other hand it can cause some heavy consequences such as man's alienation and loss of identity .
Technology has given a great number of advantages to man's life and in this sense it is a positive thing, but there are people who are victims to technology because it has increased their mental laziness and contributed to reduce their imagination, their desire to dream and to cultivate dreams actively. In this sense progress becomes a negative thing .
I think those who run the greatest risk to become victims to progress are children who spend a great deal of their free time playing video games .
The fact that in our modern age children of eight or nine can use a computer is positive because it means that the world is making progress: today a child can do things that before could do only an adult .
Computer is important in the growth of a child only when it is used moderately. If computer is the only interest in a child's life it becomes negative because it may destroy other elements which must be present not only in children's life but also in man's life in general. I think there must be a place in our life for dream and imagination and children, above all, need them to stimulate their phantasy, something that seems to have been lost in our society .
In my opinion it is up to parents in the upbringing of their children to direct them towards activities which can enrich their inner world .
Reading represents one of the best ways to stimulate their phantasy. When we read a book the words used by the writer to describe a situation or a place make us create in our mind personal images, worlds opened exclusively to us. Reading may represent a way to escape from reality, a way to satisfy the reader's wish to start for places which exist only in our mind and which are created by our phantasy. Books make us recover our cleverness to create personal images against all those pre-established images which daily are imposed to us by television or video games .
Man must realize and adults have the duty to make children realize that progress has improved and simplified our life and we must appreciate it for this, we must take from it all the advantages he can gives us but we shouldn't let progress destroy or reduce a faculty which has always been tipical of man, the faculty for dream and imagination .
| 3.0 |
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) | Albert Einstein once stated: <*> (in On Science). I interpret "knowledge" in this statment to be equal to technology. I believe that technology prevent humans' ability to use their imagination. In this essay I will only look upon one single piece of technology that in various ways has destroyed millions of people's sense of imagination. I am refering to the terrible, brain-washing, electricity-eating and worst weapon of destruction against imagination that I can think of: THE TELEVISION SET.
Some people claim that literature is dead. People in general does not read anymore. They watch TV instead. In a TV program the director has already thougth about dress, looks, sounds and surroundings for you. All you have to do is open your eyes. In a book you might be given some descriptions, but in good literature there are always gaps in the text that the reader fill in with his/her own imagination (Wolfgang Iser, a reader-response critique's theory). This process of using the imagination makes the reader learn something about his/her own ability to be creative as well as using his/her experiences .
If you watch a TV program you just sit there like a stupified receiver. Information pours into your brain. You have no chance to stop and ponder or reread something like one can when reading a book. Some literary works like novels by Dostojevskij require the reader to not only read but to think. You put the book a away for awhile, think, then go back to the text with a better understanding. I have to admit that all TV programs not are trash but I estimate that about 90% of them are .
There are also other aspects to why TV kills imagination. What would you do if you didn't have a TV? You would have a lot of time that you could employ your creative imagination to come up with ideas for recreation. You might build a boat, write a book, knit a sweater, learn how to parachute or become an English professor, i.e. the are innumerable possibilites. My opinion is that TV steals time from people. This time they could use to achieve many things and expand their ability to use their imagination .
Most of my comtemporaries are dependent on TV with its game shows and soap operas. I claim that by reading good literature one will get satisfaction from spending one's time with quality. Many people watch TV for too many hours a week. This time they could use to make the world a better place to live in. At first they could improve their personal lives by using their imagiation to achieve things they maybe never thought they could do. Then as they continue to expand their limits they may be able to interact with other people and influence them to reduce their hours of TV watching. Even though technology has immensely improved many aspects of life for humanity, I still claim that when it concerns the TV set I think this piece of technology has become misused in a way that more hinder than help mankind .
| 3.5 |
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)? | Even though your father might not be the best or always there for you he is still your father. Every father has a certain connection with there children and thats what shapes and molds a son or daughters character and personality. I believe our parents play a major role in determining who we are even if they are lousy they are still our kin. | 2 |
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: No studies have shown that.
ADU2: Violent video games, in and of themselves, do not cause people to act out violently. | Yes |
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)? | I call the god that creationists believe in the "God of the Gaps." Early man's understanding of the universe was extremely limited. People did not know that earthquakes were caused by tectonic plates shifting. Therefore the idea of earthquakes being the work of an angry deity seemed logical, but man's understanding of the universe has grown significantly. We now know that current species came to be from billions of years of evolution. Supporting creationism is holding humanity back. We need to accept the facts and let religion fade away. | 2 |
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? | Hi Guys I need to chose a high school for my daughters and my question is, is it better to send gilrs to an all girls school or a co-ed environment. Both schools are great public schools with excellent reputations,(Balwyn & Canterbury Girls) we are spoilt in that way but I want to make the best decision. Your opinions would be appreciated. Cheers Mr C | Not Persuasive |
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: William farquhar ought to be honoured as the rightful founder of singapore:
Argument: When Farquar was fired by Raffles, he was given a grander ceremony before he left compared to Raffles, which show how much the people loved him. | Does Not Have Confusing Reasoning |
Compare the given two versions of the same claim and determine which one is better (Claim 1 or Claim 2). | Claim 1: A lot of his 'do good' concepts ended up as terrible [financial failures](https://www.newsmax.com/finance/georgementz/barack-obama-biggest-financial-failures/2018/05/24/id/862327/) that are still felt to today.
Claim 2: A lot of his 'do good' concepts ended up as terrible financial failures that are still felt to today. | Claim 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 provokes thought. | Argument A: That doesn't make much sense. Why are we still evolving and the monkeys aren't? <br/> Why aren't fish jumping out of the water and growing legs? <br/> I mean, if it happened billions of years ago than how come its not happening today? <br/> Why can't we find psuedo-hybrid fish with legs forming? <br/> What caused evolution to stop happening for a mysterious time of thousands of years?
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 has language issues, bad grammar, uses humor, jokes or sarcasm. | Argument A: I think that personal pursuit is more important because in order to help others you have to help yourself first. At the time it may seem selfish but once that you get to a point that you are good at what your doing then you can help others do the same. So not only are you helping yourself but you are also helping others.
Argument B: If i say that advencing the commen good is better then a personal pursuit, then i would be lieing to myself. Everyone wants to do good in the world, but the problem with that is that their is too many bad things happening in the world, and what you do wont really make a difference. A personal persuit does more for you then trying to advance the commen good in a world where you see very little good. | No |
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: Should physical education be mandatory in schools:
Argument: a PE teachers job must be really easy. they dont need to learn anything, all they have to do is yell at kids for an hour. | Not Inappropriate Due to Other Reasons |
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: William farquhar ought to be honoured as the rightful founder of singapore:
Argument: Raffles was the person who signed a treaty with the Temenggong and also the Sultan Hussien, and not William Farquhar. I agree that William Farquhar was the one that remained in Singapore to keep it running and also developed it further, but Raffles was the one who gave him the position because he had to leave and return to Bencoolen, also, he was the one who laid out the foundation of Singapore's Development, so he should be considered a founder. | Does Not Have Confusing Reasoning |
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) | Equality is a historical question. George Orwell was not the first to put it down. The debate for equality had probably arisen since the beginning of the world, since Adam and Eva, and has been a major theme not only in the antiquity, but in the middle ages, it is a major problem now as well .
Only that its aspects and nuances have changed through time. From the beginning it was the order of Matriarchy. But then came the question: why are women more important than men?
What makes them more significant, and what gives them this role? The things changed. But this shift was no preliminary act to equality .
In the middle ages the greatest issue was equality - in one or other form. Either for voting power or for equal start in life. But despite the attempts of people there were always divisions and differences. The opportunities were never equal .
Nowadays it's difficult to define the boundaries. But still maybe in our consciousness or even in our subconsciousness we realize that there are such boundaries. Where do they lie? Perhaps the answer of this question is not that easy to find. But perhaps Orwell had not meant that some people are more equal - just that they are more privileged .
In every society there are rules and principles. But not principles of unity - these of division and selectivity are that reign .
Some people are equal - yes, but only in the limitations of a specific social group and the terms are not the same outside it .
The notion of equality is not an ideal, it's not an aim, because everyone recognizes that this aim would be groundless and impossible .
There are inferiors and superiors, and rich and poor, and workers and masters. There have been since the beginning of the world and there will always be. Each of us, who tries to abolish these relations would end with on result. Because noone could ruin an order, and organization, a hierarchy that had been existing for hundreds of thousands of years .
"If man is an animal, caught in webs of significance, he himself has spun to those webs". No one wants to be equal with others because they want to be themselves .
The aspiration of people lies in other forms - they do not wish to be equal with everyone. Men wish to be equal who stand higher in the hierarchy of the society .
In the long run, we realize that not the tendency to equality is what keeps the world turning, but the competition, the desire to do better in life and to make more achievements .
Besides, if we are all equal by rule, then why should we live? And what should we live for?
| 2.0 |
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)? | If you want your kids to wear uniforms, go to a school that allows that. But don't go crying to me that your kids are underachieving, easily-distracted, derelicts that can't focus their attention for 5 minutes in class. <br/> Maybe I'm exaggerating. <br/> But my message is clear. Uniforms are here to prevent problems that not wearing uniforms would cause. | 1 |
An argumentation should be seen as successful in making an emotional appeal if it conveys arguments and other information in a way that creates emotions, which make the target audience more open to the author’s arguments. It should be seen as not successful if rather the opposite holds. Notice that you should not judge about the persuasive effect of the author’s argumentation, but you should decide whether the argumentation makes the target audience willing/unwilling to be persuaded by the author (or to agree/disagree with the author) in principle—or neither. How would you rate the success of the author’s argumentation in making an emotional appeal on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | Estimates variously place worldwide bottled water sales at between $50 and $100 billion each year, with the market expanding at the startling annual rate of 7 percent. Bottled water is big business. But in terms of sustainability, bottled water is a dry well. | 1 |
Given a pair of argument clauses coming from the same document, predict if they are members of the same argument or not. | Clause 1: Article 5 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 5-1) contains an exhaustive list of permissible grounds for deprivation of liberty which must be interpreted strictl
Clause 2: Moreover, no evidence has been adduced to show that such decisions were unlawful, that is to say contrary to Bulgaria’s Constitution or legislation, or more specifically that the decisions were taken in excess of powers or were contrary to the law on the national budget. | Members of the same argument |
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>" | Wow anyone who does not believe prayer should be in school has not studied history. The fact is that as long as we were a praying nation in school and in government we were truly a blessed nation. Since that was removed almost 50 years ago we have been spiralling out of control. Just because you don’t believe something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Try reading the BIBLE and see what it says. Every knee will bow and toung confess that JESUS is LORD. You don’t have to believe it but it’s true. | Premise: The fact is that as long as we were a praying nation in school and in government we were truly a blessed nation. Since that was removed almost 50 years ago we have been spiralling out of control. --> Claim:
|
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: Human nature is to endeavor personal pursuit. If you assume that human nature is to endeavor advancing the common good, then you're going to get screwed by someone who endeavors personal pursuit. Most Americans endeavor advancing the common good; which is why they get screwed by politicians who endeavor personal pursuit. If everyone endeavors personal pursuit, then we would keep each other in check. It is easier to get most people to endeavor personal pursuit than it is to get most people to endeavor advancing the common good; which is why communism failed.
Argument B: I feel like a personal pursuit is better. You can't help others around you if you can't help yourself. If your personal pursuit is to make money for the needy or the common good, then it starts with you and your desire to make that money. A personal pursuit isn't always about money but it can also about happiness, love, and success. | No |
Compare the given two versions of the same claim and determine which one is better (Claim 1 or Claim 2). | Claim 1: FB and Twitter do not need to care about politics
Claim 2: FB and Twitter should not be forced to care about politics | Claim 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: I am neither Christian nor Atheist , but despite I beleive that Christianity is better than Atheism.If there is no place for God in your life , it can not even be callad as a "life".
Argument B: This is just wrong we should not insult who we believe in we do not need to know what you people think | Yes |
How would you rate the overall quality of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | There is only one situation in which I believe abortion is okay. <br/> If a mother is incapable of giving birth to the child, and attempting it might kill her, I believe abortion is sad, but necessary. <br/> Otherwise, no one has the right to kill a child, born or unborn. | 2 |
An argument has unclear meaning if its content is vague, ambiguous, or implicit, such that it remains unclear what is being said about the issue (it could also be an unrelated issue). Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument has Unclear Meaning or Does Not Have Unclear Meaning | Topic: William farquhar ought to be honoured as the rightful founder of singapore:
Argument: When Raffles came back after a period of time, he changed rules and concepts Farquhar had set according to the people's needs. This can show that he cares for the people. | Has Unclear Meaning |
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: Gay marriage is wrong. God made man and a woman to populate the earth. How can human species survive if they are only attracted to their same sex? Obviously, not.
Argument B: HOMOSEXUALITY IS WRONG!!!! And I like this website but I don't find it very clear. This one is better : theworlddebating.com | 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)? | Firefox is more respectful of W3C internet standards while soft sucks by trying to force us to use their own standards to keep their monopoly. | 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: Christianity strives to promote better morals and ethics. What does atheism contribute? Nothing. To believe that one should follow the ways of Christ, what harm is there. Real or not, Christ is still a better example to follow than any atheist. For a ideology to be better than any human must really piss off those that fall way short of it.
Argument B: I DON'T BELIEVE IN CHRISTIANITY NOR ATHEISM. I AM A MUSLIM, THATS THE BEST RELIGION... | No |
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: As we know that India is fully filled with corruption. Each and every person have no time to help others, his only aim is to earn money in any way.Our manners and civilization are reducing and reducing every day.
Argument B: When the U.S. fought the Brits for their independence, the Brits wore a red uniform. Every time the Americans saw a British soldier, they would yell, "The red coats are coming, the red coats are coming." <br/> If India ever tried to take over the U.S., Americans would be forced to yell, "The red dots are coming, the red dots are coming." ;) | Yes |
The style of an argumentation should be seen as clear if it uses gramatically correct and widely unambiguous language as well as if it avoids unnecessary complexity and deviation from the discussed issue. The used language should make it easy for you to understand without doubts what the author argues for and how. How would you rate the clarity of the style of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | i would turn in my wife because its wrong to kill someone. it could have been an accident but it was still wrong and besides the police are going to find out who killed that person but i don't want her to leave me for a long period of time so i would tell but then again i wouldn't. | 1 |
Given two arguments on a topic, decide whether they are on the same side or not. | Argument 1: a child should not be killed to save a mother: whilst these are different circumstances, and such medical emergencies are tragic, it is by no means obvious that the abortion is to be performed. the ‘mother vs. child’ dilemma is one which defies solution, and aborting to preserve one of the lives sets a dangerous precedent that it is acceptable to kill a person in order to save another. this is a clear, and unpalatable, case of treating a human-being as a means to an end.
Argument 2: abortion ban may harm poor, but does not change case against it kristin luker, dubious conceptions (1996) - "..the fact that only poor women are denied reproductive freedom when abortions are illegal is unpersuasive to those who oppose abortion on moral grounds." | Same side |
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. | Some people wouldn't be comfortable with women showing their nipples around. | Some people wouldn't be comfortable with women showing their nipples. |
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) | Almost all people believe If they have too much money, that is the happiest event in the world for them. However, almost all of us can not know money is useful or harmful for the people. What is the money? Is each rich person happy in the world? Or Is each poor person sorry for not having money? Since we can not decide it is good or bad. Why do we stil want too much money? In my opinion, If people don't know how they use money in a good way, It is the just roof of all evil. Also, there are several reasons for money's being the roof of all evil for me such as people's unability to use the money in a good way, people's esteeming to the money instead of human and the people who are nouveau riche .
First reason of money's being the roof of all evil is people's unability to use the money in a good way. You know so many rich people in the world who do not share their money anytime with any poor people. Most time, even if they know that there is a poor person who needs money very much, they do not give any money. Although they have quintillions, they don't want to give just one million as if they will be a poor person when they give this money. However, they can spend their money, easily in a bar, a party or for entertainment. They do not think poor people's life . . Retired teacher Mehmet waits in the bank queue for taking one billion for three months. It isn't important for this kind of rich people... Old Ahmet uncle waits in the hospital queue for hours and the doctor invites him to his private hospital and one day, old Ahmet uncle
dies for not having enough money. However, It is not important for the rich person, again... Elif aunt sells pullover which she knits herself, but nobody wants to buy them. In the night, she turns her house without money like three days. It is not important for the rich people again and again . . You can ask me: What do the rich people do for that? They can not help all poor people. And also the money is their own money. They gain this money themselves. I do not say that they give their all money to the poor people; thetefore, all people will be equal without working . . It is nonsence, anyway. I mean, If each rich person helps a poor person, we can develop with all people. If all rich people have conscience, there will be no class difference, and poor people will not steal, poor people do not kill anybody for taking his-her money. In that position, the poor will love the rich, and the rich will love the poor .
Second reason for money's being the root of all evil is people's esteeming to the money instead of human. Today, we almost all try to imitate the west people instead of getting our own culture. Especially, the rich think that money is the most important thing in the world and they try to do almost all thing for gaining money .
However, when they try to gain money, they become to forget some good behaviours or feelings such as respect, peace or love. They believe If they have too much money, they can do whatever they want. They can buy a perfect or they can buy a wanderful house or they can buy everything they want, but they forget that they can not buy happiness using their money. You can see some rich families. Parents give their daughter or boy everything they want, but they forget to give them love. Then you can hear this simple question from the father or mother . ''I give you everything you want. Why aren't you happy? ' ' And boy or daughter's simple answer': You have given me all thing except love' ' Of course, they are simple sentences, but these events are real. The rich forget human rights. Since they are used to do everything they want, immediately, they
don't respect the other people's feelings and If there is no respect to the other people, it means there is no love in the world .
Third reason for money's being the roof of all evil is the people who <?> riche. This kind of people are very different. They damage both themselves and the other people. Micheal Jackson is one of this kind of people. He was one of nine children of a poor family. He just had two-bedroomed house when he become rich, he bought a house which had seventeen rooms downstairs and sixteen rooms upstairs. There were a golf course, a football pitch, a swimming pool, tenis courts in his garden. Then he had so many operations for being handsome, but these operations were harmful for him. However, he wasn't interested in the damage of the operations, because he had too much money. He slept inside an oxygen capsule to live longer. Today, his face is very bad because of so many operations. He can not sing. He fells afraid in crowds and he has different
strange behaviours .
Consequently; although almost all people believe that ' ' Money is happiness'', It gets so many bad things. Therefore; there is only one thing to say: ''Money is the roof of all evil''.
| 2.5 |
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)? | Well personally I believe Google Chrome is the S*** but Firefox crashes every time I use it. | 1 |
Argument conclusions are novel when they contain novel premise-related content and/or combination of the content in the premises in a way that goes beyond what is stated in the premise. Is the conclusion novel? | Premise: White House spokesman Jay Carney said the president expects Congress to support the Libya campaign. With Gadhafi under pressure to leave power, he said weak Congressional support sends "mixed messages" about U.S. commitment to the campaign.
Conclusion: US should support Libya campaign | No |
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: Do you think it's time for the u.s. to ban all guns?:
Argument: You know, one of the first things the Nazis did in coming to power was to ban the private possession of firearms. There's a reason; when they wanted to knock the door down and carry people away without due process of law, they didn't want anyone to be able to fight back.
It is also true that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Now, some would say no, outlaws and cops. I argue that at that point, those two groups become indistinguishable. Do you honestly believe that every cop in your town is honorable and trustworthy? | Is Not Unclassified |
Given two arguments on a topic, decide whether they are on the same side or not. | Argument 1: in a different debate, i said that the fetus does not feel pain until 20 weeks(the source was in the other debate), however, they also don't have a conscious until then, so if something doesn't have a conscious until then, how can it be human? i definitely agree, however, that if it after 20 weeks, it should be illegal, because it would be murder. i really should stop bringing up the incest argument, it always gets put down
Argument 2: 1st round is acceptance i have made 4 rounds so we can still have 3 debating rounds | Not the same side |
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)? | In my opinion, I strongly agree that parents should use spanking as an option to discipline their children because the spankings are painful enough for children to learn to avoid doing the wrong things. | 1 |
Is the following argument clause a premise? | And therefore there was no violation | No |
An argument has unclear meaning if its content is vague, ambiguous, or implicit, such that it remains unclear what is being said about the issue (it could also be an unrelated issue). Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument has Unclear Meaning or Does Not Have Unclear Meaning | Topic: If prostitution is illegal, how can it be legal to pay two people to have sex and film it in a porn movie?:
Argument: The difference between the two is more like Dolphins and Porpoises not Lions and Bats.
The reason one is legal and the other is not, is because the law says one is legal and the other is not. The actual difference between the two acts are hard to see. It is not legal to have sex with someone for money, but is totally legal to have sex with someone free. It is not legal to have sex with someone for money, but it is totally legal to have film two other people having for money if you sell that film commercially. A rational, logical human being would never be able to understand this, which is why it is something only lawyers and politicians could come up with.
The bottom line is they could make prostitution legal, they chose not to, they could make porn illegal they chose not to. It is one of those cases where the difference is only what the court says is the difference. Great question. | Does Not Have Unclear Meaning |
Is the following argument clause an argument conclusion? | They consider that no substantial delays were imputable to the
Austrian authorities | 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)? | Statistics prove that less than 1% of women who are raped get pregnant because of the adrenalin rush. We have no right to take an unborn child's life. There are ways to avoid the situation of abortion. The woman can have the baby and give it up for adoption or raise it as their own because the woman is the still the child's biological mother. There are thousands of people on the waiting list for another baby to add to their family. DO NOT let anyone tell you otherwise because they obviously havn't been in the situation of adoption or abortion. | 1 |
Given an argumentative claim, decide whether it is in need of further revision or can be considered to be phrased more or less optimally (Suboptimal or Optimal). | The unified Europe will be dominated by Germany and France. Due to Lisabon treaty smaller countries lost the right of veto. Thanks to EU Germany and France could dominate other countries more than without EU. | Suboptimal |
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: It is wrong. Porn is wrong because you are being lustful: it's even more wrong when you're married because you're looking at another person in a preverted way that's not your wife or husband, which believe it or not, counts as cheating on them. But all of us have been lustful before, right? I'm not judging you, but it is wrong and you should stop.
Argument B: 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........ | No |
Given a controversial topic and a set of beliefs, generate an argumentative claim tailored to the beliefs. | Topic: rap battle
Beliefs:
Abortion: Undecided
Affirmative Action: Undecided
Animal Rights: Undecided
Barack Obama: Undecided
Border Fence: Undecided
Capitalism: Undecided
Civil Unions: Undecided
Death Penalty: Undecided
Drug Legalization: Undecided
Electoral College: Undecided
Environmental Protection: Undecided
Estate Tax: Undecided
European Union: Undecided
Euthanasia: Undecided
Federal Reserve: Undecided
Flat Tax: Undecided
Free Trade: Undecided
Gay Marriage: Undecided
Global Warming Exists: Undecided
Globalization: Undecided
Gold Standard: Undecided
Gun Rights: Undecided
Homeschooling: Undecided
Internet Censorship: Undecided
Iran-Iraq War: Undecided
Labor Union: Undecided
Legalized Prostitution: Undecided
Medicaid & Medicare: Undecided
Medical Marijuana: Pro
Military Intervention: Undecided
Minimum Wage: Undecided
National Health Care: Undecided
National Retail Sales Tax: Undecided
Occupy Movement: Undecided
Progressive Tax: Undecided
Racial Profiling: Undecided
Redistribution: Undecided
Smoking Ban: Undecided
Social Programs: Undecided
Social Security: Undecided
Socialism: Undecided
Stimulus Spending: Undecided
Term Limits: Undecided
Torture: Undecided
United Nations: Undecided
War in Afghanistan: Undecided
War on Terror: Undecided
Welfare: Undecided | I 've been debatin ' since before time initiated My skill 's only exceeded by the legends I 've created . I 've got the immortal fire pulsing through my veins Once you listen to my rap You 'll never be the same . I 'm up , live , true , jive , the chicks and cats adore me , But when it comes to iamadragon , man that robot bores me . I am the best there is , no matter what he 's wishin ' ; When it comes to me and him there is no competition . This punk 's age is only four squared but he 's rollin ' in 150 grand ; When it comes to honesty he 's the worst in the land . When it comes to rappers , you need someone you can trust . I am always honest , and my skills will never rust . So when this debate is over , friends , your choice will be clear : I 'm the only true rap debater here . |
Given the following two arguments (Argument A and Argument B), determine which of the two is more convincing. | Argument A: India is in my personal list of countries to keep an eye on over the next thirty years. I think they're a good contender for superpower status before the end of this century.
Argument B: Hi all of u.................. dis is a new gal joining da prsns who r in favor of dis argue...... those who are in oppose of dis topic..... may i request u one thing dat plz think before u tell about India"s potential bcoz the wealth which the foreigners are enjoying nw are the looted one 4m India........ The other foreign countries are more developed den us bcoz it is da Indian people who are using their brain and making the foreign countries develop.......... | Argument A |
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: India has the potential to lead the world:
Argument: The increasing population means less land, and less land means a big crowd on every place. India is able to win gold medal of corrosion, terrorism , illeteracy, violence, etc. | Is Not Unclassified |
Given two arguments on a topic, decide whether they are on the same side or not. | Argument 1: a fetus is uniquely capable of becoming a person; deserves rights
Argument 2: the scale of abortions makes state intervention compelling | Same side |
Is the following argument clause an argument conclusion? | These considerations are a sufficient basis for concluding that the reservation in question does not apply in the instant case. | Yes |
Produce a short text that argues for or against the following debate topic. | Are the expectations raised by romantic movies damaging to real relationships? | When you spend your time watching unrealistic romantic movies, you start thinking it's reality. You begin to resent your partner for not behaving the way they do in the movies. Women are especially prone to this. One could argue that it's just a movie and you shouldn't let it affect your life. However, people can't always distinguish between the two. YES, THE EXPECTATIONS RAISED BY ROMANTIC MOVIES ARE DAMAGING TO REAL RELATIONSHIPS. |
An argumentation should be seen as successful in making an emotional appeal if it conveys arguments and other information in a way that creates emotions, which make the target audience more open to the author’s arguments. It should be seen as not successful if rather the opposite holds. Notice that you should not judge about the persuasive effect of the author’s argumentation, but you should decide whether the argumentation makes the target audience willing/unwilling to be persuaded by the author (or to agree/disagree with the author) in principle—or neither. How would you rate the success of the author’s argumentation in making an emotional appeal on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | yes, i believe it's nice to have a school uniform. Each school 's uniform signifies its goal for instant i wore white shirt and blue skirt in my school days, white color is an indication of peace and blue of fidelity in relationships moreover identical uniform also removes the wall of status. it also depicts that whether a child comes from high or low class they all are treated equally under one roof . | 2 |
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: Possible ld topic: should limiting economic inequality be a more important social goal than maximizing economic freedom? stance: limiting econ inequality > maximizing econ freedom:
Argument: The poor needs help! The rich will get richier and the poor will get poorer unless we intervene. And having poor people exploited is bad for society. No heathcare, no political and legal representation, and there will be blood spilled with a revolution (as we have seen in Cuba, Russia, and China), and it will usually result in a dictatorship. This does not mean taxing people 20%, rather, it just means making it a societal goal to help the poor and invest in the people. | Does Not Lack Seriousness |
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)? | according to a recent report 50% scientists in NASA are indian IITians, just imagine that if those scientists will join ISRO then our status,value and astronomical knowledge of india will definetly increase. <br/> Now,think abt. IITians,students who are qualifying iit, they are known to be superbrain.If India is capable of opening hitech institutions,then why we are unable provide them a perfect job of their level.we are giving international status of education.then why unable to take best advantages from them.this is due to brain drain,lack of industrial development,suitable working environment as well as proper salary.so its the need of the hour to improve our industrial sector. | 1 |
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 the statutory retirement age remain at 63 years in the future?
Stance: No
Reasoning: Logical reasoning (logos-oriented) | the statutory retirement age should in the future not remain at 63 years . One might say that no one should be required to work for more than 40 years , but one isn't taking responsibility for society if one gives up one's experienced, healthy and highly qualified capabilities earlier than necessary for private/personal reasons . Indeed, due to the low birth rate, the proportion of the elderly population and with it pension costs are on the rise |
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)? | In order to help advance a common good, you must first realize what is your common good. You have to know when you are that better person to then spread your good to other people. You can't just assume that you are a great person if you don't have anything to show it. If you desire to see a world full of all this goodness, YOU have to be that spark that starts the fire. | 2 |
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. | Hofpfisterei is offering products on sale at the end of the day. [1](http://www.hofpfisterei.de/hpf_info_happyhour.php?vid=9b5amuv1d75ml1psah9bi6j1f6) | Link correction/addition |
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)? | 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. | 3 |
An argumentation should be seen as globally relevant if it contributes to the resolution of the given issue, i.e., if it provides arguments and/or other information that help to arrive at an ultimate conclusion regarding the discussed issue. You should be open to see an argumentation as relevant even if it does not your match your stance on the issue. Rather, the question is whether the provided arguments and information are worthy of being considered within the discussion of the issue. How would you rate the global relevance of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | From a religious standpoint gay marriage isn't even possible. Let along right. But everyone isn't religious or adheres to specific religious guidance. <br/> Marriage is defined as between a woman and a man. So the word "marriage" may be misused in this case. Civil unions, well that's a different matter. | 2 |
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. | A study found that predictive policing reproduces the biases that already exist in the police data in a much more precise and targeted way \(p. 15\). | Link correction/addition |
How would you rate the overall quality of the author’s argumentation on the scale "1" (Low), "2" (Average) or "3" (High)? | I think i will go with personal persuit because no matter what we do we think of ourself first. I think its the human nature.But personal pursuit does not mean being selfish and only caring about oneself.I need to think about me first,success and then think of others. Everyone does think of themselves before thinking about others. First i need to make me happy to make others happy. This way i can make my life better and be who i am. | 1 |
An argument has unclear meaning if its content is vague, ambiguous, or implicit, such that it remains unclear what is being said about the issue (it could also be an unrelated issue). Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument has Unclear Meaning or Does Not Have Unclear Meaning | Topic: William farquhar ought to be honoured as the rightful founder of singapore:
Argument: Raffles was responsible for Singapore's boost of economy
He increased the economy of Singapore by using the Straits of Malacca as a trading route.
He established free trade and thus many people came to Singapore to trade with each other, boosting Singapore's economy.
Raffles was responsible for Singapore's boost of economy | Does Not Have Unclear Meaning |
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: Christianity or atheism:
Argument: You rather die believing in god,than not believing and finding out he exists! | Does Not Lack Seriousness |
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)? | Bottled water is somewhat less likely to be found in developing countries, where public water is least safe to drink. Many government programs regularly disperse bottled water for various reasons. Distributing small bottles of water is much easier than distributing large bulk storages of water. Also contamination from large water storage containers is much more likely than from single 12-20 ounce bottles of water. | 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: Ban plastic water bottles:
Argument: The next level thinks he is the next level.
Atlas would drop the world for a chance to shake his hand. | Lacks Relevance |
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: Gay marriage right or wrong:
Argument: Why does it matter? If two people regardless of gender love each other to the point of which the two marry, shouldn't that follow what the bible really teaches us.
All you bible nutjobes by the way are making me sick. The bible teaches love and forgiveness, and lets not forget dont judge others before you judge yourself. | Lacks Relevance |
An argument is missing commitment if the topic is not taken seriously or openness other’s arguments is absent. Given the following argument and the topic of the debate the argument appeared in. Decide whether the argument Lacks Commitment or Does Not Lack Commitment | Topic: Is this one of ann coulter's top 3 worst comments ever? stance: yes definitely top 3:
Argument: In 2002 Ann wrote an article and in part of it while attempting to be funny she said that "her trying to golf was like the Special Olympics."
The article cause quite a bit of controversy, this has to be one of the meanest things she has ever said.
I like some of what Ann has to say, she makes sense some times, but you can clearly tell that she is making fun of mentally disabled people here. That is absolutely uncalled for and I think it's one of the worst things she has ever said...what do you guys think? | Does Not Lack Commitment |
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: Faruhar carried out the 'grand plan' of Raffles'. Raffles practically just sat there and watched it all go, not even lifting a finger to help. It doesn't matter if Raffles was the head of the so-called operation, Farquhar was the one to DEVELOP Singapore to what it is today.
Argument B: William Farquhar was removed from his position by Raffles because Farquhar had grown too close to the people. However, knowing the people well is necessary to help Farquhar solve the problems faced by the people. | No |
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)? | Of course its wrong. <br/> Why do you think Aids exists? | 1 |
Does the given clause belong to an argument? | As she does so, the fingers of Christ seem to curl upwards to hold with hers, whereupon the video ends. | No |
Argument conclusions are novel when they contain novel premise-related content and/or combination of the content in the premises in a way that goes beyond what is stated in the premise. Given the conclusions below: Is conclusion A better than conclusion B in terms of novelty? | Premise: Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani commented that he felt the decision to try terror suspects in New York: "seems to be an overconcern with the rights of terrorists and a lack of concern for the rights of the public.
Conclusion A: Civilian trials show more concern for terrorists than public.
Conclusion B: There is no wind on the moon. | Yes |
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)? | Well, this is not an easy question to answer because both are kind of the same to me. But i would have to say fatherless because i'd rather have no man in my life than have somebody that isn't concerned about your life at all. To me that kind of is like being fatherless. I can always find another father figure or not even as much as a father figure, more like a male role model. | 2 |
Subsets and Splits