Hindsight is 20/20; Blog 13

 

Everyone has argued about something at least once in their lives. We all have our own opinions about issues and things, and when we face someone who has a different view on that issue, an argument may emerge. Sometimes arguments can have positive effects, such as both party’s learning and understanding more about that issue, and possibly even rethinking their beliefs for the better. Other times though, which is almost everytime, neither party’s learn everything, and their argument was just verbal attacks against the person and their opinions, nothing of which is supported by facts. Arguments can range from something like the existence of Narwhals to a more controversial topic like if Donald Trump is actually a Cheeto in disguise. Yeah, that toupee is really fooling us. People sometimes have facts, but very little, and they are usually from unreliable sources such as Facebook and or Instagram. This is true not only for teens, but for adults as well. I think as a society we’ve come to just agree with whatever is said instead of doing research to see if it’s actually true. Everyone debates in pretty much the same way. We slip under the other persons bed, wait until they fall asleep, then once they have drifted off, at about three in the morning, we scream at the top of our lungs, “Your argument is invalid”. They panic and wake up terrified, although by this time we have already climbed out the window. We repeat this process every single night until, finally, their spirit has been broken, and they succumb to reality that you are correct. Or is that just me? Anyway, I think the best debate in class was probably Liz and McGarry, because it was interesting and the both people had strong arguments that were stated clearly. I would like to think the way I argue will be improved and informed, but in all honesty, it’s probably not going to change at all. I will still keep the same way I argue. At first, writing the debate was hard, and i stood in my own way, trying to figure out what to write, but after I took some time to really think about my argument, It was much easier to build a persuasive argument.

The Great Debate… Blog 12

At first, I wasn’t really sure whether marijuana should be legalized or not. After doing extensive research for weeks, I have finally come to a conclusion. Marijuana should be legalized. Tobacco and alcohol are both legal, and statistics show that they do more damage to the human body than marijuana ever could. After learning more about the effects of marijuana, both positive and negative, I’ve have research suggesting that there are more positive effects of the legalization of marijuana than negative ones. Something I found very interesting was that when smoking marijuana, users are exposed to higher amount of carcinogens than found in tobacco.And while the association between smoking marijuana and lung cancer remains unclear, marijuana smoke does contains about 50% more benzopyrene and nearly 75% more benzanthracene, both known carcinogens, than unfiltered tobacco smoke. It’s interesting because i originally thought that marijuana helped with eliminating cancer, and while studies have shown that’s true, there are also cancer causing elements within the smoke.I found this from the Alcohol and drug abuse institute. My emotional and ethical appeals tie in together in one aspect of my argument. But for just emotional, it’s also possible that legalization of marijuana could lead to increased incidents of accidental or over-ingestion, especially among children. Studies have suggested there’s been an uptick in marijuana-related hospital visits. When it comes to children, some say that as with other substances, parents should ultimately be held responsible for keeping these substances out of the hands of kids. Of course, underage kids accidentally or illegally eating pot brownies aren’t the only ones getting too high on edibles. With marijuana now legal in some states, it would make sense to see larger numbers of people who have gotten too high turning to hospitals for help, where in the past they would have been scared to admit illegal drug use. It’s worth mentioning that there isn’t much a hospital can do for these patients, besides supervise them and talk them through it. Ethically, people see drugs as bad. So of course I had to involve this, which also has emotional appeal. It’s possible that overuse of marijuana can lead to abuse and addiction, which can hurt a person’s relationships, their work and their health. It could also keep them from realizing their goals or develop themselves fully.Still, if someone’s not prone to addiction or can use without causing any great impact on their life, it seems like an allowable indulgence. Used in moderation, there doesn’t seem to be anything inherently wrong with it, but what counts as moderation? It depends so much on the person and whether they’re prone to be addicted to it.One of the problems is that you can’t really know in advance. There’s no way to know for sure if anyone will become addicted to marijuana. You don’t know what type of person you are sometimes until you start, and then it might be too late. Addiction harms the body, and we’re obliged to take care of ourselves, and it hurts those close to us. That risk is a place where the waters get muddy. You’re taking this risk that may have an impact on yourself, it may have an impact on your family — for merely an indulgence. It may turn out well, it may not, but if you can’t know, it seems to be a reason to proceed cautiously, at least. I wanted to go more logical for my constructive, but this ethical appeal was too large to ignore. I think the logical appeal to my argument, for me, is most effective. Although many just use ethical appeal, and have been using ethical appeal for years, which is why marijuana has remained illegal. On the opposite side, people use that fact that tobacco and alcohol are legal as a reason for marijuana to be legalized. One fallacy is that marijuana will lead to other, harder, drugs. One fallacy for the positive side is that, if it’s not legal, people will continue to abuse it and it will fund illegal activities. Never make up things, have everything based around facts. 

 

  

The steaks have never been higher; Blog 11

The topic I have to debate is the legalization of recreational Marijuana. I am debating against the legalization of recreational marijuana. I don’t really favor either side too strongly. On the one hand, if it were to become legal for recreational use, the government could make money off of it. This could potentially boost the economy. Although, marijuana poses possible threats of car accidents, and health problems to those who smoke it. Marijuana can effect brain development. The use of marijuana can cause lung problems such as lung infections, and lung cancer. It lowers your awareness and reaction time which could lead to an increase in car accidents. When looking up the legalization of recreational marijuana, many sites come up about which states are legalizing recreational marijuana.  Also, many sites predict which states will legalize it in the future. There really are no sites about the pros and cons of marijuana though. My logical approach to the legalization of marijuana is that even if marijuana  becomes legalized, drug tests will continue to be given, and you can be fired from your job. Also, a business can not allow both alcohol and marijuana consumption, making it illegal to smoke it in a bar. Multiple public places will still prohibit the use of marijuana, so smoking it outside could get you arrested. Marijuana can cause lung problems, mental health problems, and heart problems. Drugs are bad, ask any doctor. Almost everyone will agree that taking drugs are bad, and that they should not be legalized. Marijuana is also a drug and has an addictive nature. An emotion related to this topic could be fear. The fear that car accidents will increase, and that marijuana could make some people addicted, and could ruin lives. I think the logical appeal will be the most effective, but the ethical and emotional appeal will help to persuade anyone who is still not sure of legalizing marijuana.