Citizen Critic

1.     1. Donald Lazere in ”Reading and Writing for Civic Literacy: A Critical Citizen’s Guide” chapter 5 he discusses viewpoint, bias and fairness of a citizen critic. He gives his main ideas of what it means to be fair and what he thinks works best in being a citizen critic and what doesn’t. Lazere shares many of the same ideas that Edward Corbett and Rosa Eberly shared in their “The Elements of Reasoning.” They have similar ideas and some of them are the same. They both talk about the term “false dilemma” and how it affects becoming a citizen critic. Corbett and Eberly defines false dilemma as something that “forces a range of choices into an either/or structure” (pg. 128). Another viewpoint they have in common is “straw man.” Corbet and Eberly define straw man as something that “involves exaggerating your opponent’s position and the representing that exaggeration as his position” (pg. 130).  They both discus personal attacks as well. Instead of discussing an issue, they instead decide to attack the person that represents or supports the issue that they are against. Lazere refers to it as an ad hominem. All of these are diversions of reasoning. They are ways the “examining and critiquing the reasoning of others…” (pg.124). These ideas are put to work in Jamelle Bouie’s article “White People are Fine with Laws that Harm Blacks.” He uses the straw man fallacy to make strong points against his opponents by taking the worst thing he can use from his opponents and making it the only thing heard or remembered.  He uses false dilemma by only giving the people he interviewed a yes or no option after a short video. The solution to his problem is greater than just one question with two simple answers. He kind of uses personal attacks in his title by saying that white people are okay with harming black people instead of addressing the issue that black people are treated unfairly.

3.    3.  In “I agree, but..” McDonald used the idea of agreeing with what the opponent says but also showing them why it isn’t a good enough answer to the problem (pg. 206) He makes it a point that it isn’t good to only give reasons why you are right because your opponent will find a way to shoot you down. Lazere mentions that “stacking the deck” in your favor isn’t productive because your opponent wont listen to what you have to say if your point only talks about your ideas.  Bouie kind of stacks the deck in his favor and only shows us how his ideas are right and that white people are wrong. It doesn’t help his argument because that comes off as biased and people might get frustrated and not want to read it anymore.  

4.