instruction
stringclasses 84
values | input
stringlengths 0
21.5k
| output
stringlengths 0
8.95k
|
|---|---|---|
Given a controversial topic and a set of beliefs, generate an argumentative claim tailored to the beliefs. | Topic: abortion is morally wrong
Beliefs:
Abortion: Pro
Affirmative Action: Con
Animal Rights: No Opinion
Barack Obama: Con
Border Fence: Con
Capitalism: Pro
Civil Unions: Undecided
Death Penalty: Pro
Drug Legalization: Con
Electoral College: Pro
Environmental Protection: Pro
Estate Tax: No Opinion
European Union: No Opinion
Euthanasia: Con
Federal Reserve: No Opinion
Flat Tax: Con
Free Trade: Pro
Gay Marriage: Con
Global Warming Exists: No Opinion
Globalization: Pro
Gold Standard: Con
Gun Rights: Pro
Homeschooling: No Opinion
Internet Censorship: No Opinion
Iran-Iraq War: No Opinion
Labor Union: Undecided
Legalized Prostitution: Con
Medicaid & Medicare: No Opinion
Medical Marijuana: Con
Military Intervention: Pro
Minimum Wage: Pro
National Health Care: Con
National Retail Sales Tax: Pro
Occupy Movement: Con
Progressive Tax: Pro
Racial Profiling: Pro
Redistribution: Con
Smoking Ban: Con
Social Programs: Pro
Social Security: Pro
Socialism: Con
Stimulus Spending: Pro
Term Limits: Con
Torture: Pro
United Nations: Con
War in Afghanistan: Pro
War on Terror: Pro
Welfare: Pro | Resolution : Abortion in morally wrong . I am not arguing that abortion should be illegalized , just that it is wrong . This debate will exclude abortions done for medical reasons , such as if the mother 's life is severely endangered . ===== Definitions* ===== Abortion -- Also called voluntary abortion . the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy . Morally -- of , pertaining to , or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong Wrong -- not right , using flawed thinking or logic ( From Dictionary.com ) ===== Introduction : ===== Abortion , is perhaps , the most important issue of our time . How we , as a nation and as humans , relate to human life will impact our society for generations to come . This is not an issue to be indecisive or uneducated about . I would like to through out some facts : 1 ) Since 1973 , an estimated 50,000,000 American children have been aborted . 3,700 American children are aborted everyday . 2 ) 1 % of all abortions occur because of rape or incest ; 6 % of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child , and 93 % of all abortions occur for social reasons ( i.e . the child is unwanted or inconvenient ) . 3 ) An estimated 43 % of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old . 47 % of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion . ===== Preliminary Questions ===== I would like my opponent to address this as bluntly as he or she can : What is life ? What characteristics must be present to say something is living and has value ? And , If ONE of these characteristics is not present is it considered living ? ===== Arguments ===== a ) A fetus is living . Once a sperm and egg cell unite , the fetus is destined to be a human . It no longer a simple appendage of the mother , it is a unique entity that happens to be residing in the mother 's body . From the point of fertilization , the child 's eye and hair color , fingerprint , blood type , height , and some personality traits are all determined . Abortion is equatable with slavery . In which , a human extorts his or her wishes over another human being without their consent . To say that a fetus is not human because it is dependent on the mother and is not viable outside of the womb at that point is fallacious . The `` point of viability '' is constantly moving back because of advances in science , and can not be considered in an abortion debate . Also , dependence does n't mean the entity has no rights . A man might be in a coma and dependent on machines to keep him alive , but he has rights . b ) Abortion is a deprivation of a human 's rights . To deny somebody the right to life is to deny them liberty and the pursuit of happiness , which are spoke of in the Declaration of Independence . It is a massive civil rights violation : Deny humans the right of humanity . That is all for now . I thank and wish luck to whoever accepts this debate . |
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 gave one of these to my brother-in-law who is very hard of hearing.
He claims it has renewed his interest in TV, life in general, and saved his marriage.
His wife (my sister) hates Closed Captioning and wouldn't allow him to use it if they were both watching TV.
Now there is no need.
He can even watch TV silently while she is on the phone in the same room. | TESTIMONY
VALUE
TESTIMONY
VALUE
TESTIMONY |
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)? | India... where they have like a whole class of opressed people and a huge wealth differences? And with a language that the majority of the world can't understand and doesn't want to understand? India's education quality has nothing compared to Western education and it's the superpowers that control the world's economy. <br/> I highly doubt India will ever lead the world, and it doesn't even have the potential to. It should leave that to the superpowers. | 2 |
Produce a short text that argues for or against the following debate topic. | Is nuclear energy really safe? | I don't think that nuclear energy is safe. Just look at Fukushima, do you think that is safe? Humans are incapable because of greed to operate a reactor without cutting corners and incompetence. The pollution is long lasting, as in forever, and harmful to anything living. It is only safe if you listen to government propaganda. |
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: The Reut Institute described in a May 1, 2008 report, "a trend towards the erosion of the principle of the Two-State Solution among the'moderate' Palestinian camp, as well as among additional Arab elements.
Conclusion: Palestinian support for two-state solution declined around 2008. | Yes |
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: Firefox vs internet explorer:
Argument: Really great arguments why IE is supposed to be a better browser... NOT! | Does Not Have Confusing Reasoning |
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: Emotional reasoning (pathos-oriented) | I am not of the opinion that the retirement age should be set at 63 years . people are getting older on average so that only the question remains whether this early 'leisure' will be nicer if you have no idea what do to all day and you statistically still have almost 20 (!!!) years to go . even if Germany's aging society is undergoing demographic change |
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: Gay marriage right or wrong:
Argument: Three of your links are from right wing/conservative groups. Especially against gay marriage. They are extremely biased. I did not even have to go to the sites to know that.
Those three are #2,#3, and #5 on your list.
#2 is a polling company, if I recall and 'try' to write intelligently, but don't have research behind their writings.
#1 has no real barring on the argument at hand. | Lacks Seriousness |
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: There are a couple spots in the plastic on the top of the band that will weaken over time--especially if you have a large or wide head. These lasted a little over a year (just long enough to be out of warranty) on my husband before the band snapped just above the left earphone, leaving it dangling by just a ribbon cable. Upon further inspection after it snapped, the same area on the other side of the band was also stressed and about ready to break, and there were a couple cracks in the plastic closer to the center of the band as well. This was after a year of pretty light use by my husband, maybe a few times a month while sitting or laying down in bed. He ended up fixing it with epoxy, then heavily duct taping the whole band along with a couple sections of wire coat hanger to reinforce it. It's ugly, but it still works and he's still happy with the quality of the audio and how well the bluetooth works.
Elementary unit X: and there were a couple cracks in the plastic closer to the center of the band as well.
Proposition Y: There are a couple spots in the plastic on the top of the band that will weaken over time--especially if you have a large or wide head. | EVIDENCE |
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)? | The school my mother works at, plus the school district my cousin's 3 children are in, are utilizing school uniforms. One reason is to "reduce bullying", which in reality, doesn't even address the problem concerning bullying. The only good it does is that it gets rid of or reduces students being bullied because they aren't wearing a specific clothing label that they dictate is the IN thing to wear. While it's a problem, all it does is sweep the one basic type of bullying under the rug. Kids will find other reasons to bully others. It also infringes upon their basic rights to be individuals and to express their individuality. | 3 |
An enthymeme is defined here as any missing argumentative discourse unit (ADU) that would complete the logic of a written argument. Given the following argument with such a gap, generate a new ADU that fills the gap indicated with "<mask>". | The train is another example of what dreaming and imagination have provided us with. <mask> It's possible to dream away even at high speed. To go by train is actually quite pleasant. You can lean back and just watch the landscape pass by and daydream. The only thing you have to worry about is what station you're getting off at. This shows that not only can technology provide means of transport but also places for us to dream in . | The general opinion is that speed and dreaming don't go together at all when they in fact do. |
Given a controversial topic and a set of beliefs, generate an argumentative claim tailored to the beliefs. | Topic: what will happen once bush leave office
Beliefs:
Abortion: Con
Affirmative Action: Undecided
Animal Rights: Undecided
Barack Obama: Undecided
Border Fence: Undecided
Capitalism: Undecided
Civil Unions: Con
Death Penalty: Con
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: Con
Global Warming Exists: Undecided
Globalization: Undecided
Gold Standard: Undecided
Gun Rights: Con
Homeschooling: Undecided
Internet Censorship: Undecided
Iran-Iraq War: Con
Labor Union: Undecided
Legalized Prostitution: Undecided
Medicaid & Medicare: Undecided
Medical Marijuana: Undecided
Military Intervention: Undecided
Minimum Wage: Con
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: Con
War on Terror: Con
Welfare: Con | i believe that once bush leaves office that is many things will be reveled..i say that the many things that america all want to know the answer to will come out in the open..i reason why many of our faithful americans went over to iraq and died..everyone in america thought the war would only last about 6 month 's to a year . but look how many it went on ... why gas has gone up to about 3.24 in the last year . why world new and other resource say that by the way economy is gone , if u do n't have lot of money saved up , you are 2 pay checks away from being out on the streets ... .and there no reason for that ... why on almost every loan that has went out is know about more then half interest rate ... and many more things that no one know the answer to ... .it will all be out when he leaves office |
Is the following argument clause a premise? | since such domestic proceedings as might have been taken in relation to entry and search would have failed because domestic law provided lawful excuse for those actions | Yes |
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: Charles McCombie, Executive Director of Arius: "The worst part is the part that we don’t see – the mining and milling of uranium.
Conclusion: Nuclear energy requires harmful mining/milling of uranium. | Yes |
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: Will roe versus wade be overturned?:
Argument: Sadly, not likely. Even with the new Chief Justice and Associate Justice, it is not likely that the court will mess with existing precident.
Hopefully, though, the court will see fit to uphold such things as bans on late-term, will require parental notification for teenagers, and will require these "doctors" to become required reporters of abuse like all other medical professionals. | Does Not Have Unclear Meaning |
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: Without TV actors/actresses wouldn't have jobs. <br/> Without TV you wouldn't know what's happening around the world. I mean the newspapers can't fit all that in. <br/> Books and newspapers can't give you emergency warnings or updates or new flashes
Argument B: You can watch TV in one sitting where as a book takes all day to read. So no physical exercise will get done reading books. Exercise shows on TV make you move. SO TV IS WAY BETTER THEN BOOKS!!!!!!! | Yes |
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) | Traditionally people differentiate alpha from beta sciences. Alpha sciences are also called positive sciences ( mathematics, physics, chemistry ... ), while beta sciences deal about the human brain and man's activities .
There used to be a time when science was a passionate occupation, based solely on the curiosity of the individual himself. The hunger for true knowledge inspired the "spirit of the labs". When it appeared that these "fruits of amazement" resulted in practical tools, it was twice a victory .
Nowadays research is submitted to the growing demands of society. Science must have a useful dimension. Modern man is spoilt. We try to create our own needs and science must bring revelation. Utility prevails upon originality. Therefore science has become an economic product. Its results must have a certain value at the market. Researchers are degrading themselves. They seem to have reached the infamous level of publicity agents, desperately trying to sell their ideas to large institutions like the State or multi-nationals. So, rich nations and organisations are the only ones to hold the key of true knowledge. By using it they control man's thoughts and man's future .
The moral decay of science is thus in fact a luxury problem. More and faster are the keywords of modern times. There are, however, limits to speed and capacity. That's why mankind invented machines. These machines stood in service of humanity. Nowadays, man often stands in service of the machine, slowly becoming a machine himself .
To ultimate aim of science is to reach infinity. That is what I call scientific arrogance, because every living process is born to decease one day. When we strive for everlasting life we are, in fact, feeding this process of dehumanilization. Man is born to die. The fear of death is one of the most important aspects in a human life. When science deprives us of our right to die, we cease to be human beings .
When does Huxley's science fiction novel " Brave New World" stops to be fiction ? If I hear about the frightening progress that is being made in genetics, I fear not too long .
In the very near future scientists will be able to compose a human being, solely with genetic material. The proud "parents" can choose the I.Q., length, colour of the eyes ... of their newborn "lab-child". Even the gothic novelist Mary Shelley could not foresee that a modern version of Frankenstein is now ready to rule the world .
Another bloodcurdling evolution is the development of Virtual Reality. Soon we will be able to do practically everything in a world designed by computers. Contact with real human beings will be limited as much as possible. This can't be healthy for the human spirit. V.R. will alter us all into hermits .
Can we do something to stop scientific arrogance ? I must admit that it is very hard to fight against the natural law of progression. I hope, however, that some people share my point of vieuw on this matter. We must try to provoke a social debate about esthetics, which is the paramount beta science, in order to break the supremacy of the devastating alpha sciences. This debate is very important: humanity is at stake !
I am not an enemy of alpha sciences. We need chemistry, for instance, to provide medication. I do object to the search for infinity. Let us all dream about paradise instead of looking for it. A perfect world with perfect people must be a very boring place. And besides, true knowledge is not to be found on your computer-screen; it is to be found in the heart .
| 3.0 |
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: The noise cancelling effect works for cancelling out low pitch noise like vehicle engines. I imagine they'd be great on an airplane. But the noise cancelling effect is almost non-existent for mid and high pitches. In a typical 'coffee shop' setting I don't notice any difference at all between having these things turned on and turned off. You'll be able to hear people talk just as well with these as without them. Playing music will help drown out the noise... but then again any earbuds would do that for you. These also play 'loud on the outside'. I can have the volume up just loud enough to enjoy my music (3 volume bars on macbook air) and people can hear music coming from my earbuds from across the room. I don't like being "that guy" with earbuds that everyone can hear. I wouldn't recommend these.
Elementary unit X: In a typical 'coffee shop' setting I don't notice any difference at all between having these things turned on and turned off.
Proposition Y: But the noise cancelling effect is almost non-existent for mid and high pitches. | EVIDENCE |
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: Raise the Rim?
Additional Info: Many basketball players today are a foot taller than players were in the 1800s; the rim is no longer out of reach. Should it be raised?
Claim: Rim should be raised
Reason: The slam dunk has lessened the attraction of watching an NBA game.
Warrant 1: most players in the NBA are not able to dunk
Warrant 2: most players in the NBA are able to dunk | most players in the NBA are able to dunk |
Given a pair of argument clauses coming from the same document, predict if they are members of the same argument or not. | Clause 1: The Court observes that the refusal to grant Visions of Ecstasy a distribution certificate was intended to protect "the rights of others", and more specifically to provide protection against seriously offensive attacks on matters regarded as sacred by Christians (see paragraph 48 above)
Clause 2: The laws to which the applicant made reference (see paragraph 54 above) and which pursue related but distinct aims are thus not relevant in this context | Members of the same 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 provides no facts, not enough support, not credible evidence or no clear explanation. | 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: you cannot argue with the theory of creatoinism without getting into an extreamly dumb argument because anybody who beleives in creatoinism who is arguing with anyone who doesn't can say that god makes them think what they think <br/> TAKE A HINT EVERYBODY THIS ARGUMENT IS MORONIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | 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: 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.
Argument B: There are direct links to drinking bottled water and certain types of disease, even cancer. | No |
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: Gay marriage right or wrong:
Argument: Three of your links are from right wing/conservative groups. Especially against gay marriage. They are extremely biased. I did not even have to go to the sites to know that.
Those three are #2,#3, and #5 on your list.
#2 is a polling company, if I recall and 'try' to write intelligently, but don't have research behind their writings.
#1 has no real barring on the argument at hand. | Lacks Intelligibility |
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 statement "feminists have done more harm to the cause of women than good" is false. In fact, feminists are the ones who have fought and managed an improvement of women's situation in society, although there is still a hard work to do. In order to support this argument, we are going to review the following subjects: Labour discrimination, the right to vote, the fight against male chauvinist behaviours, the representation of women in important political charges and the recognition of the sexuality in woman .
Nowadays, the Spanish Law penalizes sexual discrimination as for labour. The last sentences are becoming favourables to women. A few weeks ago, for instance, an enterprise has been charged with paying more money to men than to women, when both accomplished the same work. Other theme to be discussed is the women's right ~o vote, which has to do with the equality in the rights of the State. feminist pressures were used for the recognition of women's sufrage in Spain, in 1931. Besides, thanks to the fight of feminist groups, more reactionarity male shauvinist behaviours are denounced, the agressions are reported, and rapings are punished with greater severity, although there are exceptions, as always. To take an obvious example, a few years ago, and even today in some cases, the girl who wore a mini-skirt was the real guilty of her raping. Moreover, in the present political parties (especially in those which are situated in the center-left wing), women begin to be considered when taking important decisions. In an increasing way, women request more participation in the direction organs. In Spain we have three women who hold the charge of ministers in our government. But the world of women is still a dropout in the political world. At last, we must state that it is due to the feminist struggle that the sexuality of women is put on the same level as masculine one, and it is not so hidden. Before this, man could enjoy with his sex and be proud of his potency (or prepotency} whereas woman, had as her only function in society, that of procreating. With the sexual liberation, women advanced towards the knowledge and experimentation of their own body .
Therefore, the equality of wages, the right to vote, the consideration of women as inferior and less intelligents beings, the higher percentage of participation of women in charges with power of decision, and the fact of recognising their own sexuality are some of the consequences of the feminist fight since it, the oldest revolution of this century, began. Two weeks ago, I concentrated with some women to protest against two men who had raped a girl. They are free because she was scared and left to her country; therefore, the denounce has being stopped. Then the evidence is clear , there is no doubt that there was a rape, even from the point of view of the law. But in a legal way there is nothing to be done: only to demonstrate your rage for another injustice committed against women. This act has done more harm to the cause of women than good: from the rapers' point of view. That's why I am a militant feminist .
| 3.0 |
Given the following two arguments (Argument A and Argument B), determine which of the two is more convincing. | Argument A: Water bottle usage, although maybe a leading corporate industry, is not worth making the environment worse than it already is. These bottles will not start to decompose for another 700 years.
Argument B: He doesn't give high fives; only high sixes <br/> He is the Godfather's Godfather <br/> He once taught a german shepherd to bark in spanish.. | Argument A |
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)? | 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. | 1 |
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/[...]”. | Life n Soul, you have done an excellent job on Bluetooth headphones.
I would recommend to anyone,
Thanks again. | VALUE
VALUE
VALUE |
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: To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and — more profoundly — our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.
Conclusion: Wave energy will occupy a large area of coastline | 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: Some would argue that schools need more money to spend on this kind of creative approach.
ADU2: Spending more money, hasn't improved national test scores though. | Yes |
Decide, whether the two sentences are similar or not, based on the given topic. Choose one of the following options: Different Topic/Can’t decide (DTORCD): Either one or both of the sentences belong to a topic different than the given one, or you can’t understand one or both sentences. If you choose this option, you need to very briefly explain, why you chose it (e.g.“The second sentence is not grammatical”, “The first sentence is from a different topic” etc.). No Similarity (NS): The two arguments belong to the same topic, but they don’t show any similarity, i.e. they speak aboutcompletely different aspects of the topic. Some Similarity (SS): The two arguments belong to the same topic, showing semantic similarity on a few aspects, but thecentral message is rather different, or one argument is way less specific than the other. High Similarity (HS): The two arguments belong to the same topic, and they speak about the same aspect, e.g. using different words. | Topic: Organ donation
Sentence 1: Offshore wind power plants have better wind velocity profile leading\\\\server05\\productn\\C\\CJP\\14-1\\CJP102.txt
Sentence 2: Early sites such as Six Degrees.com and Friendster allowed people to manage a list of friends. | Different Topic/Can’t decide (DTORCD) |
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)? | The argument that porn would expose one to the reality in life, and thus increasing one's maturity and prevent possible future sexual assaults, is totally crap. <br/> porn is definitely wrong. after a dosage, the guilt of wasting ur time, wasting energy, wasting effort and not devoting urself to another thing and regretting that you should not have started would almost kill you. trust me. <br/> its a road that shld not be taken, its as bad as smoking and dugs. i think the only reason its not banned in most developed countries is that they are facing an aging population. | 1 |
Decide, whether the two sentences are similar or not, based on the given topic. Choose one of the following options: Different Topic/Can’t decide (DTORCD): Either one or both of the sentences belong to a topic different than the given one, or you can’t understand one or both sentences. If you choose this option, you need to very briefly explain, why you chose it (e.g.“The second sentence is not grammatical”, “The first sentence is from a different topic” etc.). No Similarity (NS): The two arguments belong to the same topic, but they don’t show any similarity, i.e. they speak aboutcompletely different aspects of the topic. Some Similarity (SS): The two arguments belong to the same topic, showing semantic similarity on a few aspects, but thecentral message is rather different, or one argument is way less specific than the other. High Similarity (HS): The two arguments belong to the same topic, and they speak about the same aspect, e.g. using different words. | Topic: Stem cell research
Sentence 1: Scientists say cloning offers a unique way to produce cells that may someday be used to treat diseases.
Sentence 2: This is material is being thrown away anyway in landfills, when it could be saving lives in more ways than curing just diabetes. | No Similarity (NS) |
Given a sentence and a topic, classify the sentence as a “supporting argument” or “opposing argument” if it includes a relevant reason for supporting or opposing the topic, or as a “non-argument” if it does not include a reason or is not relevant to the topic. | Sentence: If you actually look at the statistics , a gun in the home is much more dangerous to the owner than likely to be used in self-defense .
Topic: gun control | supporting argument |
Given a pair of argument clauses coming from the same document, predict if they are members of the same argument or not. | Clause 1: On 7 and 8 October 1991, the High Court heard the two applications, that is, the appeal by way of case stated and the application for judicial review
Clause 2: The applicant was represented and had legal aid for the appeals | Not members of the same argument |
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: Science can prove that evolution is the beginning of life. <br/> The big bang theory is a term used to describe the bursting of molecules that begun the creation of the universe. The universe started out as a hot, dense space. Scientists know that because now nearby galaxies are moving further and further away and the universe is expanding and becoming cooler, so, in the past, the universe must have been hotter and more dense. Earth was the perfect candidate for life because it has the "Goldilocks" conditions. Bacteria started to form from molecules, which formed into fish, and then amphibians, then land animals, then monkeys, then humans.
Argument B: I like to think both are true. <br/> 1. God created the first things (i don't think adam and ever were really human, maybe single celled. but man had a hard time believing that so we made the first creatures Man) <br/> 2. Those things God created Evolved to fit their surroundings. (there is proof of this, you can not deny this. i do not know if we came from monkeys or not.) <br/> I believe in God and Evolution. | Yes |
Score the helpfulness of the following review on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 4 (highest). | The first set of Earbuds I received did not work and they sent out a new pair to replace them. These have been the best wireless Earbuds I have used. They fit great and the sound is even better. I use the phone portion of these earbuds a lot and they work very well, people tell me they here me just fine without the back ground noise. I was looking for a cheaper alternative and I am happy to say I found them. | 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 has more details, information, facts, examples, reasons, better arguments, goes deeper or is more specific. | Argument A: From a biological standpoint, men and women were "engineered" to be together. This idea was corrupted by the morals and society of our time.
Argument B: Of course its wrong. <br/> Why do you think Aids exists? | 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 more details, information, facts, examples, reasons, better arguments, goes deeper or is more specific. | Argument A: One word: Adoption <br/> There is absolutley no reason to receive an abortion when you could continue through to birth and then put the child up for adoption. <br/> This is a commonly ignored fact in the abortion debate. But I think it is by far the best choice.
Argument B: when people condemned consensual-cannibalism in africa, did they think of these people's right to their bodies? no. why should abortion be any different? | 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 provides no facts, not enough support, not credible evidence or no clear explanation. | Argument A: well with our water bottle consumption on the planet earth, we could cover all of mexico 3 Times, of could that would be a lot of "rich" in their mind Mexicans.
Argument B: The next level thinks he is the next level. <br/> Atlas would drop the world for a chance to shake his hand. | 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 unclear, or hard to follow. | Argument A: There are direct links to drinking bottled water and certain types of disease, even cancer.
Argument B: He doesn't give high fives; only high sixes <br/> He is the Godfather's Godfather <br/> He once taught a german shepherd to bark in spanish.. | No |
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: A two-state solution offers the Palestinians a very small amount of territory in the West Bank and Gaza strip. This small amount of space is not going to work for such a large and rapidly growing population of Palestinians.
Conclusion: Constructing and transporting wave power systems requires substantial energy. | 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: Firefox vs internet explorer:
Argument: You go to school with me and you are 14 years old lol. | Is Not Emotionally Deceptive |
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: Uniforms allow an equal and fair social status only based on personality and not looks. I do half to admit wearing what you want is fun and creative but its only fun if everyone can do it and for some children thats not the case and they cant afford to live up to their peers standards so uniforms would make social life much easier and it would give a more mature look to the school.
Argument B: Wearing school uniform U can be sure that you go to school to study, not showing how fashionable you are | 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: There are tons of ways to not get pregnant. There are condoms (99% effective) for men and women, there are morning-after pills (75% effective), the patch, pill, and other forms of ways not to get pregnant. It's the woman's fault that she didn't do it. <br/> And maybe instead of Pro-choice vs. Pro-life, they (i don't know who "they" is) should have pro-life, but with exceptions (i.e. women that get raped) so that it's fair all-around.
Argument B: for everyone who is talking about RAPE in this subject let me ask you one thing!!!! if you got in a huge fight with someone and ended up breaking your hand or arm... would you cut it off just because it would REMIND you of that expirience??? <br/> if your actualy SANE you would say no and if you say yes you need to see a Physiatrist!!!! | Yes |
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 the morning-after pill be sold over the counter at the pharmacy?
Stance: No
Reasoning: Logical reasoning (logos-oriented) | an unwanted pregnancy can place a significant strain on both the parents and the child for the rest of their lives . Having said that, there's the risk that women could use the over-the-counter morning-after pill as a substitute for contraception . the morning-after pill could result in a decrease in the use of condoms and lead to an increase in new infections with Aids . Furthermore, easy access to the morning-after pill could result in its appearing to be an easier method than other forms of contraception that have fewer health effects . |
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 argue for the rights of the child, who deserves the same right to life as the mother
Argument B: I choose life <br/> Reagan once said something like this <br/> Notice that everyone who is pro choice has been born | 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 only opinion, or a rant. | Argument A: i think with this growing condition Idia cannot replace other developed countries like USA LONDON AND other countries. <br/> Because most of the people are illitrate here so i think india cant.
Argument B: Why should India lead the world???!!! <br/> Kill all the politicians first and India will be developed tomorrow. | 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)? | From a design standpoint, Firefox absolutely wins the Pretty Browser battle. <br/> There is such an array of beautiful skins out there for Firefox, and when you add that to the amount of Toolbar and UI customization that Firefox supports, the 'Fox is the clear-cut winner. <br/> And since I assume most of the people debating the superiority of one browser or another are Intraweb junkies, I know everyone uses their browser quite often. <br/> Who wants to look at an ugly UI like that of every IE (7 is the most criminal of them all)? | 2 |
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: Business review: 4.0 stars
business name: mesa grill. city: las vegas. categories: american (traditional), restaurants, mexican, new mexican cuisine, barbeque, spanish, southern, tex mex, american (new):
Argument: I loathe Vegas but can't avoid it for work. It's restaurants like Mesa that make it bearable for me.
Not a celebrity chef-chaser, but chose this because of other reviews and Flay's reputation. It did NOT disappoint.
Duck starter made me swoon. Wow. Spicy.
Queso fundido was great.
Tuna entree was amazing.
Service was top notch and authentic.
This is a pricy place but well worth the investment. | Appropriate |
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: India has the potential to lead the world:
Argument: India is a good country to live in...
it has diverse culture but still it unites as one.
Saare jagah se achcha...
Hindustan hamara... | Lacks Intelligibility |
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. | Conscription would impose high costs on individuals. | Clarification |
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)? | As an ambitious, young person wanting to become a lawful, successful, homicide detective, I would not be lenient with any murderer in my midst. <br/> Hopefully, the murder wouldn't be the result of a pleasure/malicious-kill, so that the sentencing won't be as harsh, but nonetheless, all murderers must be tried. After all, hopefully my spouse will understand that having to live in hiding is basically the same as being in prison except much worse since there would be little chance for parole since they will have to live with the guilt and/or the fear of being caught for the rest of their lives. | 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)? | 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 |
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) | After television has been invented, it soon became the most popular form
of entertainment all over the world. It just likes the opium that makes people to be slaves of it. However, few people realized the problem. Television does not look as if it will be less popular in the world of the future. Instead, it seems that it will become more popular. Therefore, the problem becomes more serious .
We cannot deny that television provides us a more convenient way to get the latest information, but we also have to admit that television is the opium of the masses in the society. There are many disadvantages of television. For one thing, nowadays, most families have at least one television. They watch TV whenever they are at home. Take myself as an example, there is a television in my room. Once I entered the room, I would turn on the television at first no matter what program was on show. It seems to me that television is one of the necessities in my daily life. When I am bored and tired, all I need to do is just to turn on the television and to be given passive entertainment. Also if you were stuck on a TV program, you would watch it everyday whether you were busy or not. It is the same that if you have tried the opium you could never quit the habit .
Secondly, television killed people's own creativity and made them lazy. The viewers usually make no judgement and accept everything presented to them from the television. Though many programs are educational and introduce people to things which they may not know before. However, it makes viewers become receptive and unquestioning. Also it makes viewers become lazy and lack of exercises. The viewers need to do nothing. They do not even have to move if they have a remote control. Most people stayed at the seats for several hours watching TV. Television takes up much time of a person and makes him lazy. Beside a person's health, television may also have bad effect on your family. Since you spend more time on television, you may ignore your family and be lack of communication with your relatives. It likes the opium which not only has bad effects on a person's health, but also on his/her family .
Also some TV shows can be harmful to children. Many advertisements are written to create a desire to children for unnecessary products. Besides, some programs that include violence or sex give children confusing and misleading ideas. To some degree, television is like the opium of the children which affects them badly .
On the whole, television is the opium of the masses in modern society. It makes you stuck on it, does harm to your health and family, and has bad effects on children's mind. It seems that we are becoming the slaves of television. However, we have to avoid this result being come true. What we should do is to regard television as our assistant, not our master .
| 3.5 |
Predict the stance (pro, con, or unknown) of the user on the corresponding big issue from the text of the claim. | I will accept this challenge . I tend to write some disturbing things . It is fun to make people squirm . You may post your story first . | pro |
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: I learned English through TV. <br/> Technically, I learned English through interaction with native speakers, but TV helped a lot more than books.
Argument B: I like tv because you can watch all the porn you want with your family | No |
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. | The desire to acquire the license will mean that prospective parents themselves will try to learn more about how to become better parents. The license system will therefore encourage self-improvement in prospective parents. | Clarification |
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: Evolution vs creation:
Argument: it shouldnt be about how we got here but why are we here. | Lacks Seriousness |
Score the helpfulness of the following review on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 4 (highest). | Took a chance and ordered two pair as inexpensive back-ups for iPhone. Normally I compare earbuds to my Sony; 'til now the best sound for $$. Sound quality of these KingAcc is outstanding. The bass is the best I've heard. So ordered two more sets, this time with volume control. KingAcc seems anxious to please and with this price and 12 mo warranty there is little worry about replacing them.. | 0 |
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: Business review: 5.0 stars
business name: creek side taco shack. city: queen creek. categories: restaurants, mexican, tacos:
Argument: This place is not 5 stars, but with a few tweaks, it could be. I am giving it 5 stars so that the ranking on yelp doesn't go any lower. I hope management is reading these reviews as most people are spot on. Needs: better customer service training for your staff, better lighting for night time sports, additional seating. This stuff is easy, but will be the demise if not corrected. | Does Not Have Unclear Meaning |
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: William farquhar ought to be honoured as the rightful founder of singapore:
Argument: Raffles conceived a town plan to remodel Singapore into a modern city. The plan consisted of separate areas for different ethnic groups and provision of other facilities such as roads, schools and lands for government buildings. In October 1822, a Town Plan Committee was formed by Raffles to oversee the project. | Is Unclassified |
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: I am personally against the abortion, but I believe in the right of choice. What matters to a pregnant mother what I think or what most of the people thinks about it. She must decide what to do with her child.
Argument B: So then you're saying the if the woman were to get an abortion right after than t would be fine? | Yes |
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)? | PORN iS WRONG WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO WATCH PEOPLE HAVE SEX!! MAYBE EVERYONE FEEL DIFFERENT BUT STILL IF YU WANNA WATCH PEOPLE HAVE SEX GET A MIRROR AND HAVE SEX AND LOOK AT YUR SELF...CUZ KIDS OUT HERE R WATCHIN IT AND DOIN THE WRONG THINGS! | 1 |
Extract the central claim from the following argumentative text. | The world is fast changing and it is important for schools to keep pace. The average student is exposed to video games from a young age and appealing to this may help them learn. It could be cause for concern that they have too much exposure to "screens," and video games have no place in the classroom. Despite this, learning should evolve in creative ways, such as using video games as a tool. | Despite this, learning should evolve in creative ways, such as using video games as a tool. |
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) | Nobody can contest that at the end of the 20th century, our whole civilization is dominated by technique and industrialisation. Since the industrial revolution, the tremendous progresses realized by science have disrupted our habits and our ways of living. Its material benefits are obvious: improvement of our living standarts and prolongation of life, disappearance of hunger in the world,... In the contrary, in countries where the technical development doesn't exist or is unsufficient (for example in Somalia or Ethiopia) reign malnutrition, illness, misery and analphabetism. There is no place for Icarus' dream... Our lot is much more enviable than the one of those remote countries of Africa. But how much do we have to pay for this material comfort, this unceasing run after progress?
During centuries man has been subject to the law of nature. The modern man dominates nature; the problem for him is not so much to adapt himself to it but to the technical setting he has created. We live in the reign of automation, electronics, robots and computers. In front of his screen he communicates where he wants to, as quickly as he wants to .
And the Earth is no longer enough for him: he conquers the Space. The moon is no longer the inviolate planet, accomplice to his love affairs during a summer night but a celestial resort of the earth .
On earth America and Asia are almost next door for us and at every hour of the day or of the night electronics weaves as lightning between the continents a multitude of bounds .
What is left for dream, imagination in a world where nothing more is accessible?
Fairies, enchanters are now called computer, television, spatial rocket. In this utilitarist society the key word is speed, synonym of productivity .
Man is so organized that all his activities have for purpose to increase material satisfactions .
These conquests of progress threaten our secret garden, the poetic field of our dreams, our imagination .
And though is it reasonable to affirm that in this modern world, there is no longer a place for dreaming and imagination?
Man is more than an animal. The satisfaction of material needs is not enough for him. He needs to transcend himself, to escape from our world through dreams and imagination. He symbolizes his emotions in the form of art, music, theatre. The scientific 20th century is not less rich than the previous ones in the artistic field .
I think of the Novel whose remarkable creations are numerous and satisfy our imaginary, ouR need of escape. Cinema has also its numerous adepts and the technical prowesses of images transport the spectator in a fairy world. Here technique is in our imagination's service .
In our everyday life, we all need to have intimate moments with ourselves. A balanced life keeps for itself a part of dream to distract itself from the stress and the material requirements of everyday life. That is the language of the heart and it is necessary to everyone .
Scientists and scholars know it too: Pascal, the mathematician; Pasteur, the biologist, Schweitzer, the physician, were goodhearted men, poets or musicians .
I'll go further: scientific progresses suppress (more and more) hard work, they liberate man and provide him with leisures which are favourable to his personal opening. By contributing to his intellectual blooming and to his "well-being", technique preserves and refines the field of dreams and imagination. It orientates human work to Creation, Invention, it makes Icarus' or Prometheus' dream possible .
Far from approving the opinion which was proposed, I"ll say in conclusion that technique is not a fatality that should end with the degradation of man. It has carried him away in the implacable cycle of productivity, produce and material profit .
But it has especially transformed him spiritually and socially to a more human opening where dream and imagination have their necessary place .
| 2.5 |
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 have been a long term defender of public education - although fortunately have the advantage of living in a higher SES area where the public schools are relatively well resourced. Made the decision this year to move eldest child out of the public system and into a Catholic private school as really felt that the large public high school didn't have its eye on the ball when it came to student welfare, particularly in relation to bullying between the boys and self harming and worrying attitudes to eating amongst the girls. Also, while academic standards were high, it was very much a 'survival of the fittest' type attitude which posed challenges for our bright but sensitive daughter. We are finding the Catholic school much kinder and more supportive on the whole and also, surprisingly, stronger on things like social justice and inclusion of students with disabilities and that type of thing. | Rebuttal: I have been a long term defender of public education - although fortunately have the advantage of living in a higher SES area where the public schools are relatively well resourced. --> Claim:
Premise: Made the decision this year to move eldest child out of the public system and into a Catholic private school as really felt that the large public high school didn't have its eye on the ball when it came to student welfare, particularly in relation to bullying between the boys and self harming and worrying attitudes to eating amongst the girls. --> Claim:
Premise: Also, while academic standards were high, it was very much a 'survival of the fittest' type attitude which posed challenges for our bright but sensitive daughter. --> Claim:
Premise: We are finding the Catholic school much kinder and more supportive on the whole and also, surprisingly, stronger on things like social justice and inclusion of students with disabilities and that type of thing. --> 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? | The public schooling system is not as bad as some may think. Some mentioned that those who are educated in the public schools are less educated, well I actually think it would be in the reverse. Student who study in the private sector actually pay a fair amount of fees to do so and I believe that the students actually get let off for a lot more than anyone would in a public school. And its all because of the money.
In a private school, a student being expelled or suspended is not just one student out the door, its the rest of that students schooling life fees gone. Whereas in a public school, its just the student gone.
I have always gone to public schools and when I finished I got into University. I do not feel disadvantaged at all. | Persuasive |
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)? | I'm sad to see the way this turned out. With not so little respect and so much spamming. I choose atheism over a Christianity because their is not enough evidence to soothe my curiosity. Christianity raises too many questions that it never answers. | 2 |
Given a controversial topic and a set of beliefs, generate an argumentative claim tailored to the beliefs. | Topic: capitalism
Beliefs:
Abortion: No Opinion
Affirmative Action: Con
Animal Rights: No Opinion
Barack Obama: Con
Border Fence: Con
Capitalism: Pro
Civil Unions: Pro
Death Penalty: Con
Drug Legalization: Pro
Electoral College: Con
Environmental Protection: Pro
Estate Tax: Con
European Union: Con
Euthanasia: No Opinion
Federal Reserve: Con
Flat Tax: Pro
Free Trade: Pro
Gay Marriage: Pro
Global Warming Exists: Pro
Globalization: Pro
Gold Standard: Pro
Gun Rights: Pro
Homeschooling: Pro
Internet Censorship: Con
Iran-Iraq War: Con
Labor Union: Pro
Legalized Prostitution: Pro
Medicaid & Medicare: Con
Medical Marijuana: Pro
Military Intervention: Con
Minimum Wage: Con
National Health Care: Con
National Retail Sales Tax: Con
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: Con
United Nations: Con
War in Afghanistan: Con
War on Terror: Con
Welfare: Con | We use Capitalism because it functions . That , however , does not mean that it is adequate . We constantly see the rich taking advantage of the poor and every time the market is n't controlled our economy spirals up and down . These spirals result in occurrences such as the Great Depression and the 2008 Economic Crisis . Poverty in Capitalist countries is always high , and classes form . These classes have limited mobility as it is often very difficult for a lower class citizen to work their way up the career ladder . Freedom can also exist without Capitalism . Freedoms of press , speech , religion , you name it can exist without Capitalism . A society without these freedoms is called a Fascism . A society without Capitalism is not necessarily a Fascism , and democracy can exist without Capitalism. , so save your stances on democracy for another debate . Although one of the most prominent solutions , Communism does not necessarily have to be THE solution . A successful Communism would far surpass a successful Capitalism , but at the moment the idea 's implementation is unrealistic . |
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: Are police in the us alowed to knock your door down without anouncing themselves?:
Argument: They can now and here in Florida it is legal for a person to shoot if they feel that they are in danger for their life. And you know what, if someone bashed my door down I'd shoot first and ask questions later. I think this may be very bad for all the police trying to do their jobs. What in Gods' name were they thinking? Some idiot right wingers may think this is OK but heaven help the cops. | Is Emotionally Deceptive |
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: Evolution vs creation:
Argument: 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. | Lacks 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 is only opinion, or a rant. | Argument A: TV is better because you can just explore the world while sitting on a couch
Argument B: I like tv because you can watch all the porn you want with your family | No |
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: Ban plastic water bottles:
Argument: craig is a hypocryte with bottled water and should not be taken seriously | Lacks Intelligibility |
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. Generate multiple key points on the given topic and provide the stance of each key point towards the topic. | Topic: Homeschooling should be banned | Homeschooling is often the best option for catering for the needs of exceptional/religious/ill/disabled students. (con)
Homeschools can be personalized to the child's pace/needs (con)
Mainstream schools have a lot of violence/bullying (con)
Parents should be permitted to choose the education of their children (con)
Parents will have more ability to pay-attention/educate their child (con)
The home is a good learning environment (con)
Mainstream schools are essential to develop social skills (pro)
Parents are not qualified as teachers (pro)
Homeschools cannot be regulated/standardized (pro)
Mainstream schools are of higher educational quality (pro) |
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)? | I strongly believe parents should not use physical punishment like spanking to discipline their child. The child will obey if they have a strong healthy relationship with a parent, if they have gained their respect. The parents should have a friendly relationship with their child and the child will soon respect them and agree to what their parents decide although they may not like it. They will learn that the parents know whats best for them. | 2 |
An argument is missing openness if it displays an unwillingness to consider arguments with opposing viewpoints and does not assess the arguments on their merits but simply rejects them out of hand. Decide whether the argument Lacks Openness or Does Not Lack Openness | Topic: Is this an example of a judgmental creator god's free will? stance: yes, mankind is defective, prone to evil because of original sin & satan:
Argument: Man always has the freedom to do what he wants to do, but not what he should do.
Adam had the choice to do either good or evil. He chose evil. That choice damaged his relationship with God and resulted in an evil world. Now man still has freedom to do what he wants to to do. The problem is that man only wants to rebel and do evil. Look around for proof.
But God has a remedy for the evil. It is Jesus Christ.
Repent and trust in Him. | Lacks Openness |
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: Is personhood absolute or is it predicated upon position? <br/> If a premature baby is lying in an incubator or, let's say for the sake of argument, a 5 gallon pail, it is illegal to kill it. Why does the situation change so drastically just because the child is inside the womb?
Argument B: 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. <br/> 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. | Yes |
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: private military companies help bring down the cost of military action by our government.
Argument: Hiring private military companies is financially beneficial | Yes |
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: Do We Still Need Libraries?
Additional Info: What are libraries for, and how should they evolve?
Claim: We need libraries
Reason: Libraries will keep print media alive.
Warrant 1: it doesn't needs to die
Warrant 2: it needs to die quickly | it doesn't needs to die |
Segment the following review into its elementary argumentative units. Elementary argumentative units are the fundamental components of an argument. | Comfortable, but have an issue with Bluetooth connection, the sounds breaks a lot. Also, noise cancelling mentioned in the description? Not so much. | Comfortable, but have an issue with Bluetooth connection,
the sounds breaks a lot.
Also, noise cancelling mentioned in the description? Not so much. |
Predict the stance (pro, con, or unknown) of the user on the corresponding big issue from the text of the claim. | Introduction : Thank you , CON , for allowing me to debate you in this topic . I will attempt to use sound arguments to justify the belief in God . The Existence of God- A Priori Arguments Mind Over Matter This universe consists of matter and energy . In the theistic understanding of the universe , mind is the originator of matter , as opposed to an atheistic and evolutionary stance- matter causes mind . Before arguing for a mind to the universe , allow me to enter a third principle to the universe- information . To prove that information is separate from matter and energy , allow me to present an analogy : If I write a certain collection of letters , like , “ elhlo , ” then the reader should not be able to make an understanding of those letters . However , if I rearrange the letters to “ hello , ” the reader should then understand the collection of letters as a word that conveys the meaning of a form of greeting someone . As you can see , matter was the medium used to convey the information . I would form the word “ hello ” on a computer , on a chalkboard , or on pen and paper . The material used would be different each time , that is , the medium to convey the information would be distinct , but the information would still be the same . When dealing with information , there are two proponents needed . First , a sender , to form the information . Secondly , the receiver must be able to obtain and understand the information . To clarify “ understanding the information ” , imagine a Chinese person reading the word “ hello. ” If that person has no understanding of the English language , then they will not be able to understand the word “ hello. ” So , the sender must have an intention when delivering the information- that the message will be received and be understood . Information , not matter and energy , is the underlying principle of the universe . From genetics , to language , to the physical laws of the universe , information is the critical component . P1 : Information is the underlying principle of reality . P2 : Information requires a sender . C : There is a sender that caused all of the information ( order ) in reality . The Prime Mover As everyone would agree , there necessarily exists the first cause of everything . What my opponent and I will disagree about is whether that first cause is God , or quantum fluctuations , or what have you . Everything that exists ( besides the prime mover ) is dependent on another part of existence . For example , the organism that is a cat is dependent on cells and structures , which are in turn dependent on molecules , which in turn are dependent on atoms , which are dependent on quarks , and so on . Cat ^ cells ^ molecules ^ atoms ^ quarks The prime mover is not dependent on any part of reality . The prime mover exists through itself , not something that causes itself . As you can see from the text image , the prime mover would also be the simplest form/most fundamental of existence . As it is the most fundamental form of existence , it exists without boundaries . To understand the significance of boundaries , refer again to the text image . The cat is higher up on the form of complexity . A cat can not be both a cat and dog at the same time . It is limited to being a cat . However , cells are not limited to cats , and can be formed to exist in other animals . However , cells are limited to exist in that form . Atoms are not limited to animals- they form all parts of the universe . As we travel farther down the simplicity of existence , the less boundaries exist , and the more forms can be created from these states of existence . Recall the famous double split experiment , where a single photon behaved both like a particle and a wave . This is possible because boundaries decrease as we travel down the chain of existence . So , the prime mover must be free from all boundaries . It is necessarily limitless . Also , because it is at the lowest point in the chain of existence , it can interact with all of reality . Not only does this prime mover interact with all of reality , all of reality is continuously depending on it . The prime mover that intends to create order ( information ) in the universe , while also continuously upholding all of creation , can only be understood as the eternal mind that underlies all of reality . This is otherwise known as God . ( Because of space , an anticipated argument against God using the evidential problem of evil is expected , and will be dealt with in a subsequent round . ) Intenionality Imagine that you are sitting at a table , and you notice a cup . You intend to grab the cup , so two possible scenarios ensue : 1 ) You pick it up and take a drink . 2 ) You attempt to pick up the cup and accidentally spill it over the floor . Both scenarios , the intentional and accidental , are explained by a preceding intentional action . Intentionality can lead to either intentional or accidental effects . However , no purpose can ever derive from contingent accidental causes . This example is to show that all outcomes of life refer back to an earlier intentional action . This causal chain can not go backwards into infinity , so there must have been a first intentional action- God intentionally creating the universe . If God does n't exist , and the universe came into being unintentionally , then the only contingent actions are necessarily unintentional . If my opponent concedes this , then my opponent concedes that they are just an accidental collocation of atoms , and any argument they give has no inherent meaning . Given that their argument is meaningless , I win by default . If they do n't concede this , then they must concede that God exists . The Rationality of Christianity- A Posteriori Arguments The Historicity of Christ . There are 12 historical facts that most secular ( non-christian ) critical scholars agree to . They are ( 1 ) : -Jesus died by crucifixion . -He was buried . -His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope . -The tomb was empty ( the most contested ) . -The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus . -The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers . -The resurrection was the central message . -They preached the message of Jesus ’ resurrection in Jerusalem . -The Church was born and grew . -James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus ( James was a family skeptic ) . -Paul was converted to the faith ( Paul was an outsider skeptic ) . There are three possible scenarios : The early disciples all had hallucinations of Christ at different times and places and were convinced that it was real ; The early disciples hid Christ 's body from the tomb , spread the lie that he was resurrected , and were tortured and killed to protect that lie ; or Christ was resurrected by God and this is what the apostle 's saw and preached . The apostles directly denied that what they saw were hallucinations . ( 2 ) This either leaves the apostles lying and then dying for that lie , or the resurrection actually happened . I argue that Christ was really resurrected by God , because it is not reasonable to believe that they lied . If anyone objects to this ( like my opponent ) , then they must give a motive for why the apostles would be tortured and killed for the lie- what was their benefit ? Also , examples must be given for people who died protecting something they knew to be a lie ( not examples of people dying for what they believe to be true , but what they definitely knew was false ) . If these two problems are not refuted , one must conclude that Christ was resurrected by God . Miracles Craig S. Keener ( 3 ) is received his Ph.D in New Testament Studies from Duke University . He has published a book ( 4 ) on miracles . Here is a brief , few minute interview ( 5 ) and a longer lecture for viewers of this debate who are interested ( 6 ) . The author researched the credibility of miracles from various cultures all around the world . There are over one thousand accounts in his book ( he was very extensive and it took him many years to accomplish ) . In the book , he provides examples of everything from simple medical healings to people being raised from the dead , all by people praying in the name of Jesus . Also , 73 percent of American physicians believe in miracles , and 55 percent claim to have witnessed treatment results they consider miraculous ( 7 ) . I would argue that since so many people around the world now have documented evidence of their testimonies , and that well trained and educated physicians can corroborate the claims , it would be irrational to dismiss miracles as impossible or false . And , if people are praying to Jesus and are being healed in ways that define medical explanation , even to the point where they are being raised from the dead , one should find it rational to believe that there does indeed exist a God who does interact with the world , and cares enough to answer the prayers of the faithful . References 1 http : //www3.telus.net ... 2 Luke Chapter 24 3 https : //en.wikipedia.org ... 4 https : //www.amazon.com ... 5 https : //www.youtube.com ... 6 https : //www.youtube.com ... 7 http : //www.huffingtonpost.com ... | con |
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: but the constant use of cell phones is definitely not bringing families closer together.
ADU: We live in the age of technology | opp |
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: Is it time to end the cuban blockade? stance: time to move on, allow normal relations, trade & travel with cuba.:
Argument: The Cold War is over, there's no more USSR, the Berlin Wall no longer exists, we trade with China and other socialist, commuist and or dictatorship countries. There are many US bases agricultors and companies wanting to trade with Cuba which will help open Cuban society as US business take hold on the island along with increased tourism making contact with Cubans. It is obviuos that the current political stance is a failure, there are 48 years of non-change to prove it, a new policy should be established, why continue with the same old, same old with no change?
Jon Jax 71 | Does Not Lack Seriousness |
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: Consumer philanthropy stance: good what ever generates more money for charity:
Argument: Isn't barely helping better than not helping?
And if I am going to buy an iPod either way, isn't it better to buy a red one that sends even a tiny fraction of the purchase price to fighting AIDS than a green one that goes better with my wardrobe but doesn't raise money for anyone but Apple?
Gestures like those ridiculous Livestrong bracelets are weak, but when it's something you were already going to buy (read: NOT a stupid-looking rubber bracelet), I think that having a philanthropic option is refreshing--even if it's just a LITTLE philanthropic. The previous options weren't at ALL philanthropic.
If it's no worse and it's not the same, odds are it's, well, a little better. | Is Not Emotionally Deceptive |
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: everyone knows that whatever the outcome of the trial, KSM will never walk free. He will spend the rest of his natural life in U.S. custody. Which makes the proceedings a farcical show trial from the very beginning.
Conclusion: 9/11 suspect KSM would never walk free. | Yes |
An argument is missing openness if it displays an unwillingness to consider arguments with opposing viewpoints and does not assess the arguments on their merits but simply rejects them out of hand. Decide whether the argument Lacks Openness or Does Not Lack Openness | Topic: Christianity or atheism:
Argument: Science attests to the existence of God, its only a question of which one at this point. | Lacks Openness |
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)? | it is better to help yourself before you can help others. for instance, if you don't have your life together how are you going to help someone else with theirs. if your still living at home with your mother and you don't have a job and one want to help out by giving to an organization you couldn't do it. so basically you have to help yourself before you can help others. | 2 |
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)? | 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 is non-sense, has no logical sense or is confusing. | Argument A: I believe that the school uniform is a good idea because school uniform improve student attendance and student doesn't spend a lot of time to choosing and buying clothes for school, espeacilly girls. That is why they can use more time to study.
Argument B: it is good to follow to proper school code and the right to express emotions is right but not necessary as we have come school for learning | 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? | Referencing to <R> article points out that a high proportion of students use their credit card in a responsible way. They can wisely take the benefit of the best deals on offer. Many will use their credit card to buy books and educational software, so parents can help students to meet the high costs. <mask> They may spend a considerable amount of money on buying many references books or even a personal computer to handle their school assignments. In this way, parents can give them a hand with expenses if they pay things with card . | 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: Actually, creationism is an argument that has been in existence since the beginning of recorded history <br/> With the writing of the Old Testament <br/> I think you are referring to a time of more recent Christianity <br/> So the Biblical account is an argument which has been in existance much longer than your note
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 A is more convincing because it is clear, crisp, to the point or well written. | Argument A: A personal pursuit is a better endeavor because you are fulfilling something within yourself. It is important to help others but there is a time to do so. Achieving a personal goal is a journey to fulfillment where one is truly happy. Before helping others you must remember about yourself, but you must not forget about those who are really in need.
Argument B: 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. | 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: Firefox vs internet explorer:
Argument: Firefox has the user made extensions which cater for the user based community therefore it wins | Is Not Emotionally Deceptive |
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)? | 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. | 2 |
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 the school uniform a good or bad idea:
Argument: people cant be forced to wear school uniforms, i mean each person has theri own wish whether they want to or dont want to wear school uniforms. I think each principal should think once again regarding the uniforms | Is Unclassified |
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: it is not wrong, and if your talking about the actors doing the scene its theyre choice..they like doing it and its not degrading to women they wanna do it. we have freedom of expression you know. and it also helps some of us to be open about sex
Argument B: No porn is not wrong. As an abstract noun, it cannot be wrong. | 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: Pro choice vs pro life:
Argument: I choose life. Keeping the law pro-choice is allowing women to murder their own unborn human child. | Has Excessive Intensity |
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 was sent to private schools my first 7 of years of schooling. It went great as far as academics and learning. Then, I was switched to public schooling in a "better" district, and my grades went from A's to D's. It wasn't that I was stupid or that my parents wouldn't help, it was that I was bored to tears and had teachers who, even obvious to a 7th grader, HATED their jobs. Good parents do what is best for their children, and they already support public schools with their tax dollars whether or not their children attend. So, I guess by the author's reasoning, we're ALL "good" people. | Premise: It wasn't that I was stupid or that my parents wouldn't help, it was that I was bored to tears and had teachers who, even obvious to a 7th grader, HATED their jobs. --> Claim:
Backing: I was sent to private schools my first 7 of years of schooling. It went great as far as academics and learning. Then, I was switched to public schooling in a "better" district, and my grades went from A's to D's.
|
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: Boycotts of one producer lead others to act out of fear of negative publicity - the market takes care of the problem itself.
Conclusion: Consumer pressure is a powerful tool. | Yes |
Predict the stance (pro, con, or unknown) of the user on the corresponding big issue from the text of the claim. | That 's not what God meant for us to do . You respect a dead body and do n't humiliate it . If you do something like that to a body you will be sent to hell . | pro |
Subsets and Splits