Deductive Reasoning, being the top-down logic in which an argument can be proven from a premesis proven to be true, certainly played a part in my part in writing Doc1. Though I did not view it in that way.
Basically, I gave multiple examples of police brutality, with the long known assumption that police officers targeted the african american community, backed by statistical evidence, and then included examples of victims of police violence that did not meet the usual standards for the crime. My argument was that everyone could, potentially, become the victim of police brutality. As such, not only giving the statistics of crimes over all but then following that up with examples of crimes against two unsuspecting individuals (a young man with down syndrome & a nonagenarian in a nursing home), I made the point that even seeemingly innocuous people could be killed by law enforcement.
I hope I did a good job with that.
Good job I agree that it could be anyone no matter what race,gender, or size. Its unfortunate that the world has become such an angry place.
ReplyDeleteHmm … so what is your premise? Is it true? and what conclusion does it lead to? I think your use of concrete examples is more inductive reasoning than deductive, but no matter, so long as it works. Good job.
ReplyDeleteI thought you did an excellent job in writing your Doc 1! I liked the way you used those examples to prove the point you were trying to make.
ReplyDeleteyour examples were effective
ReplyDelete