Considering Types

To narrow down what my public argument will be like, I'm considering which type of public argument type will be best for me to accomplish the purpose of my argument.

stillwellmike. "Saguaro National Park, Tucson, AZ." 3/11/12 via Flickr.
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License.

In looking at the different types of arguments, I'm seeing that a refutation argument might be most useful.  I want to prove that the current Tucson drought plan is not comprehensive enough, and doesn't thoroughly consider the long term effects of drought.  In doing this, I would analyze the drought plan and point out the weaknesses.  Like the exercise we did in class (although we didn't get to the refutation part), I would point out the ineffective points of the current proposal that exists.

Another possibility I'm considering is a proposal argument.  Because I want the drought plan to be changed, I could go about that by proposing my own ideas of what would be effective instead.  However, I don't think that I'm experienced and knowledgeable enough to make a plan that was as comprehensive as it needs to be, since I don't know a lot about water law and policy yet (I haven't yet taken those classes).

A causal argument or a proposal argument don't seem like they would be a very helpful way for me to present and organize my argument.  The cause of why I think the current drought plan is unsuitable doesn't really matter; what matters is that it needs to be fixed.  And finding the pros and cons also doesn't really make sense either.  Lastly, an evaluative argument is the opposite of what I want to do, because I don't want to praise and support the plan, I want to change it.  Of course, that doesn't mean I want to attack the current plan totally, and I understand that even the fundamental fact we have a drought plan is important and not something that should be taken for granted.  The general idea of the plan is good.  The only problem is, it doesn't go in depth enough.  So because of this, a refutation argument would probably be most suitable for my argument.


REFLECTION

Both Austin and Chris are considering refutation arguments like me.  I think that refutation arguments might be common for this assignment, because it's easy to find things that we're not happy about to make a strong argument against.  Personally, I'm considering to lean towards refutation, but I'm wondering if I could do a mix of a refutation and a proposal.  Because although I am not experienced enough to give highly detailed advice, I do have some suggestions, and I want to be able to propose some solutions instead of just being critical.  Because I've actually talked with the mayor, and I know that they are trying to make water conservation a priority, but it might be hard to take drastic action.  I also want to acknowledge that Tucson does have the right idea, and so I don't want to be totally harsh and attacking the city council.