The Latest Study on Trigger Warnings Finally Convinced Me They’re Not Worth It
Questions
1. Why do you think Palus opens her piece with a startling statement? What appeal(s) (ethos, pathos, logos) was she addressing with this hook?
2. Where does Palus introduce her claim – In paragraph 1, 2, or 3? After identifying the paragraph, copy and paste her claim.
3. In paragraph 3, Palus cites an article, “Trigger Warning: Empirical Evidence Ahead”, then proceeds to summarize the article. Download and skim through the study (also under Readings) and decide if Palus used the article effectively and responsibly. Explain your conclusion using evidence from both Palus’s article and from the study to support your opinion.
4. Also in paragraph 3, Palus provides a link to an article explaining two additional studies and published in the New York Times. (Click on that link by holding the ctrl key while pushing the enter key on your keyboard.) Were you able to get the article? If so, did Palus use this article effectively and responsibly? If you were unable to get the article, would this oversight be a dealbreaker for you in adopting her viewpoint expressed in her claim? Why or why not?
5. In paragraph 4, Palus introduces her first counterargument in this paragraph’s topic sentence. What method does Palus use to address the counterargument: acknowledgement, accommodation, or refutation? How do you know? Finally, do you think a link to the article would have helped improve her ethos?
6. In paragraph 5, Palus introduces her second counterargument, also in this paragraph’s topic sentence. What method does Palus use to address the counterargument: acknowledgement, accommodation, or refutation? How do you know?
7. In paragraph 5, pay attention to the third sentence. Is this statement expressing a certainty or a possibility? How does the verb used provide clues?
8. Also in paragraph 5, read the third and the fourth sentences together, then rewrite these two sentences by providing a suitable transitional word or phrase to help with coherence. You may join the two sentences or keep them separate, but do not omit any important words or phrases that may change the original meaning of these sentences.
9. To wrap up paragraph 5, note the evidence Palus used to support her claim and to counter the opposing viewpoint. Then skim through the article (also under Readings, titled “Katy Waldman Slate Article”), then decide if Palus used the article effectively and responsibly. Explain your conclusion using evidence from both Palus’s article and the Waldman piece to support your opinion.
10. In paragraph 6, Palus introduces her third counterargument in the topic sentence. After citing and quoting the New York Times article (previously used in para. 3), how does her conclusion sentence clarify McNally’s conclusions?
11. In paragraph 7, Palus introduces her fourth counterargument in the topic sentence. What method does Palus use to address the counterargument: acknowledgement, accommodation, or refutation? How do you know?
12. In paragraph 8, Palus introduces her fifth and final counterargument in the topic sentence. What method does Palus use to address the counterargument: acknowledgement, accommodation, or refutation? How do you know?
13. Paragraph 9 is Palus’s conclusion paragraph. Keeping in mind that all of her discussion points involved addressing counterarguments, what kind of readership did Palus anticipate: friendly, neutral, or hostile? Do you think that Palus effectively defended her claim? Did she prove her point? Explain fully.