Wolfer’s Argument Analysis
One of the first things I quickly pointed out when reading Wolfer’s essay is that he got into into the meat of his argument and immediately started talking about the student loan debt unlike the other authors that played with their words a bit and gave some background before getting into the topic at hand. If we look at the title of his essay “Forgive Student Loans? Worst Idea Ever.” we can already see he shows us his side of the argument loud and clear for everyone to see. I think this is smarter than the other authors whose titles only gave away the subject since it works like a hook that gets people more interested on his point of view. However, I also feel the title could have a better quotation than “worst idea …show more content…
In none of his points does he ever use data or research to try and make better arguments, he mostly makes a lot of assumptions and not once does he look at the multiple consequences they could have. Wolfers also comes out as pretty contentious with his wording. Examples of his aggressive wording are in paragraph 5 where he calls college graduates a bunch of kids to try and make them look childish and uneducated and in the conclusion where he outright calls loan forgiveness the “worst idea ever” when that is a pretty bold statement. My biggest gripe with this essay is that Wolfers didn’t even try once to look at the other sides to maybe try and understand where they are coming from and know why and what makes them think the way they do. Something I did enjoy a lot about the essay is how it was structured. The opening and conclusion could use some work, but the essay’s structure was very neatly done to illustrate the points he made and not once did he go off topic on what he was talking about. All in all I think Wolfers come out as somewhat biased and distasteful, but I do think his essay should be read by people since it has some good examples of what one can avoid when writing an argumentative
One of the first things I quickly pointed out when reading Wolfer’s essay is that he got into into the meat of his argument and immediately started talking about the student loan debt unlike the other authors that played with their words a bit and gave some background before getting into the topic at hand. If we look at the title of his essay “Forgive Student Loans? Worst Idea Ever.” we can already see he shows us his side of the argument loud and clear for everyone to see. I think this is smarter than the other authors whose titles only gave away the subject since it works like a hook that gets people more interested on his point of view. However, I also feel the title could have a better quotation than “worst idea …show more content…
In none of his points does he ever use data or research to try and make better arguments, he mostly makes a lot of assumptions and not once does he look at the multiple consequences they could have. Wolfers also comes out as pretty contentious with his wording. Examples of his aggressive wording are in paragraph 5 where he calls college graduates a bunch of kids to try and make them look childish and uneducated and in the conclusion where he outright calls loan forgiveness the “worst idea ever” when that is a pretty bold statement. My biggest gripe with this essay is that Wolfers didn’t even try once to look at the other sides to maybe try and understand where they are coming from and know why and what makes them think the way they do. Something I did enjoy a lot about the essay is how it was structured. The opening and conclusion could use some work, but the essay’s structure was very neatly done to illustrate the points he made and not once did he go off topic on what he was talking about. All in all I think Wolfers come out as somewhat biased and distasteful, but I do think his essay should be read by people since it has some good examples of what one can avoid when writing an argumentative