I. Introduce the topic of the essay.A. Use a rhetorical tool, or several, to draw interest in the topic, possibly through a question, scenario, anecdote, series of facts, numbers, authoritative testimony, examples, or metaphors.B. State a thesis on the ambivalently viewed issue that clearly states a logically biased perspective on the SIRS topic, stating the major reasons for bias (drawn from the subtopics in the body). This can be tacked onto the reporting thesis.II. Background according to history and topicality (recent relevance) should be established. Add a fairly recent topical story from a newspaper, magazine, or radio transcript to show recent interest in your issue and its vitality.III (-VI?) Carefully analyze subtopics from each perspective in a compare-and-contrastformat that touches one subtopic at a time (such as ethics, economics, types of effects,and so on).A. Define key terms.B. Describe varying categories.C. Present reasons and consequences for each side’s position.D. Clarify any moral or technical dilemmas.VII. Bridge into your own analysis of the logical fallacies in the opposition’s position.A. Note overstatements and any poor logic or preposterously used scenarios.B. Note cloudy moral stances or clear violations of general ethics.VIII. Restate the clearer position of the side that you advocate, admitting flaws but showingclear reasons for preference over the alternative.IX. Conclude with an honestly biased summary of why one position is more favorable.
I. Introduce the topic of the essay.A. Use a rhetorical tool, or several, to draw interest in the topic, possibly through a question, scenario, anecdote, series of facts, numbers, authoritative testimony, examples, or metaphors.B. State a thesis on the ambivalently viewed issue that clearly states a logically biased perspective on the SIRS topic, stating the major reasons for bias (drawn from the subtopics in the body). This can be tacked onto the reporting thesis.II. Background according to history and topicality (recent relevance) should be established. Add a fairly recent topical story from a newspaper, magazine, or radio transcript to show recent interest in your issue and its vitality.III (-VI?) Carefully analyze subtopics from each perspective in a compare-and-contrastformat that touches one subtopic at a time (such as ethics, economics, types of effects,and so on).A. Define key terms.B. Describe varying categories.C. Present reasons and consequences for each side’s position.D. Clarify any moral or technical dilemmas.VII. Bridge into your own analysis of the logical fallacies in the opposition’s position.A. Note overstatements and any poor logic or preposterously used scenarios.B. Note cloudy moral stances or clear violations of general ethics.VIII. Restate the clearer position of the side that you advocate, admitting flaws but showingclear reasons for preference over the alternative.IX. Conclude with an honestly biased summary of why one position is more favorable.
