Evaluation of an argument through analysis Essay - 1

Evaluation of an argument through analysis - Essay Example To aggrandize on this judgment, it is wise to relate the aspect of rational and irrational factors; while the latter can be related to women, it can as well be used to justify why women speak much. Irrational persons tend not to take close precaution while speaking and factors can be related to their superior speaking techniques which in most cases are situation and theoretically assembled (Holmes, 38). Nevertheless, rational talk attributed to men is based on attributes of honesty, factual and being concise. However, Holmes argument is not based on the amount of words spoken but on the quality of the talk. She challenges women to construct a formidable talk in order to counter balance patriarchy. Primarily, Holmes present women talk based on social factors such as friendship and trivial relationships, compared to male talk which focused on critical global arguments. To justify the above description, it is wise to note that Holmes essay is based empirical evidence in critical examina tion based on science, environment and demagogy principles. The essay has applied strong literature dogmas; for instance, of humor, proverbs, imagery/ symbolism, simile/ metaphors and as well borrowing close examples. This essay will counter examine Holmes essay by; firstly, close checking on the claim and subsidiary claims. Secondly, the essay will base its principles on hilarious practical evidence presented. Thirdly, the essay will examine on technical presentation applied by Holmes; primarily focusing on opposing views, credibility, language, organization and the tone of the essay. Finally, the conclusion will establish whether the argument â€Å"women talk too much is valid†. Claim What is the main claim presented in the essay? Is it clearly stated the essay does it reflect the purpose of the essay The main claim in the essay is the argument against the quality of talk compared between sexes and what governs the talk. While men uses talk to exemplify power, women uses ta lk to express emotions and relations. Women are more interested on trivial elements; for instance, of how the society perceive them as individuals and not what men argues out; how the society perceive the general concept life and how it affects mankind, what are the necessary changes and solutions to challenges. The essay categorizes men as discreet and in very unique cases they would speak out their problems but women are more interested in speaking out their lives to access comfort. According to Holmes (43), men are interested in presenting a certain social point of view and debating on it, while women are more concerned whether the point of view does directly affect them What are subsidiary claims presented in the essay? In other words what claims are used to support the main claim? Are the claims clear and valid? And they related to the main claim? Holmes aggrandizes on the main point of view, literature aspects have been categorically employed to empower the main point. Subsidi ary claims presented stretch from literature, psychological, gender and biological claims. For instance, according to the essay women are more interested to hear their own voice than the validity of what they are talking about. Consequently, biological claims prove that; while a male is developing before conception, the testosterone hormone alters the brain (Brizendine, 2011 56). The hormone is significant in

Present and contrast Hobbes and Nietzsche's account on the Essay

Present and contrast Hobbes and Nietzsche's account on the punishment - Essay Example that the society employees in treating those who have violated the societal norms and laws; for Nietzsche, the members of the society feel pleasure by subjecting criminals to punishment. A critical look at the Hobbes’ and Nietzsche’s accounts of punishment shows that the main difference in their views of punishment lies in the fact that Hobbes analysed the meaning and the importance of punishment from the social contract point of view, while Nietzsche analysed the importance and the role of punishment in society from the historical point of view. According to Thomas Hobbes, punishment is a mean that the society uses to enforce the social contract. For Hobbes, once the members of the society enters into a social contract or covenant, the members of the society agree to forgo some of their civil liberties for the sake of social order; according to Hobbes, the members of a society enters into a social contract and forgoes some of their social liberties for the greater good of all the members of the society. This is because the civil liberties that the members of the public forgo are vested in a sovereign who uses the power that he has been given by the people to protect other individual civil liberties, and hence ensure peace and order in the society. For Hobbes, therefore, Punishment is a tool that the members of the society, through the sovereign, uses to deal with those who violate the demands of social contract, so as to ensure peace and order in the society. According Friedrich Nietzsche, on the other hand, the role of punishment in the society is to give pleasure to the members of the society through subjecting those who have violated societal norms and laws to punishment. In his analysis of the early procedures of punishment, Friedrich Nietzsche argued that, from the historical point of view, punishment was not meant to make the law breakers or the criminals experience pain and guilt, but it was meant to make those who were executing the punishment to