Dear Editor,
This is my commentary on Cynthia Walker’s June 17th, Saturday
column
”
Going over the basics about opinion writing.
”
Dear Editor,
This is my commentary on Cynthia Walker’s June 17th, Saturday column “Going over the basics about opinion writing.”
The column did not live up to the titles exceptions of providing insightful tips on the art of essay writing that one might expect from an educated columnist.
The author moves quickly through the first five paragraphs in a rather wordy and rhetorical fashion. By the fourth paragraph she is suggesting that the quality of a opinion piece is “categorized” by whether or not the “… author has succeeded in supporting his points.” This view depends largely on the readers ability to comprehend and to lesser extent agree with the opinion. However a better method is to evaluate any authors ability to articulate his thoughts on paper.
An attempt was made at the end of the fifth paragraph to show an example of a straightforward self supporting fact, “… Al-Zarqwi is dead.” It failed because there was not enough data to for a positive identification of the person who died. It must be assumed that the writer and the reader are of one mind. Al-Zarqawi is surname.
It is at this point, that the author moves away from the essay lesson to suggest that the letter, as she wrote it, and not the edited version in the column.
“Although I agree with Ms. Walker, Republicans party of present, say after Ronald Reagan, is NOT the same party of Lincoln, Nixon et. al.”
Because the adjective “all” was used the quotation was labeled a fallacy of hasty generalization. In order to prove that it was a false statement, it was alleged that only one dissenting vote would be needed, which the columnist cast.
As for the hasty generalization fallacy, this is when a small sampling is used to represent the whole. An example would be, a few liberals are bleeding hearts, therefore all liberals are bleeding hearts. To prove the use of a fallacy one only need show that the sampling is too small.
The problem with fallacy referencing is that most people don’t understand the concept, so a rebuttal is not likely to be registered.
The column gets into one sided historical issues unrelated to the letter. Then again refers to another fallacy, ad hominem, which means “to the man.” This fallacy attacks the person and not the argument. Not all ad hominems are fallacies, as when a theft is called a theft.
The allegation that Ms. Stone used this fallacy when she wrote “From my perspective, the present-day Republican party and their social conservative constituents are a group of belligerent, intolerant, angry people who are against ANYONE who looks, speaks, believes or acts outside the realm of their OWN comfort levels.” This was not an ad hominem but a hasty generalization fallacy.
My advice regarding opinion essays, more objective and less subjective views.
Harold Williams, San Jose.
