Claims worth Arguing

Hurricanes are increasing in number and ferocity: this is a claim worth arguing, because not only does it deal with a popular issue, such as global warming, but it also is based on fact and can be supported using evidence found in scientific journals.

Many people die annually of cancer: this is not a claim worthy of defending, because it is merely an observation, and it is too vague to properly find enough information to support the statement.

Fewer people would die of heart disease each year if more of them paid attention to their diets. This is a valid statement based on fact, and it is also one that information can be easily found. It is worth arguing to a college audience, because it deals with an issue that is prevalent in many people’s lives.

Japan might have come to terms more readily in 1945 if the Allies hadn’t demanded unconditional surrender: I would defend this statement, because even though it is speculation, this claim can be defended and supported using historical information, and it always helps to re-examine the past.

Boys would do better in school if there were more men teaching in elementary and secondary classrooms: I would not defend this claim, because changing the female to male ratio of teachers in the classroom isn’t the only factor to increase the performance rate of boys. To try and argue that by changing that one thing would increase the scores is a fallacy.

The ever-increasing number of minorities in higher education is evidence that racial problems have just about ended in the United States: this is not a claim worthy of defending, because it is an erroneous belief to assume that because numbers are increasing of minorities in the classroom is directly related to solving racial injustice. The issue skips over too many other important factors to be seriously defended.

There aren’t enough high paying jobs for college graduates these days: this is also a claim not worth defending, because it is false. Most of the higher paid jobs out in the job marketplace require a college degree, and to imply that the jobs are disappearing would also be a fallacy.
Hydrogen many never be a viable alternative to fossil fuels because it takes too much energy to change hydrogen into a useable form: this claim is worth defending to a college audience, because it is based on fact, and the information can be readily found in scientific journals to support the argument.

Only one of the first forty-three presidents of the United States was a Catholic: this is not worth defending, because it is a statement and not a claim. The topic is too shallow for proper analysis to occur.

Political activists have grossly exaggerated the effects of the USA Patriot Act on free expression: even though I don’t agree with the statement, I believe that this claim is worthy of defense. The information can be found in various political and governmental sites, and it is also something that is a current issue and affects all of our lives here in the United States.