In class we read and began discussion on the issue of the Islamic Cultural Center being built near ground zero. The way we shape our views on topics is framed by the immediate information made available to us as well as a foundation established at home, based on morals, values, politics, and religion among others. As we have discussed, these "interpretations" and the claims we make merit critical analysis as we try to formulate support for our opinions or claims. Logical reasoning is, thus, imperative in establishing a strong and persuasive argument. Those arguments that lack logic and are founded principally in emotion are the ones that tend to be easily deconstructed. Arguments based on emotion, while moving and powerful, depend on the fact that the audience targeted is moved by the emotional evidence because there is a common thread of values and principals upon which that emotional evidence is founded on. If that does not exist than the emotional argument fails.
In the following two videos watch how two different sources formulate their arguments and attempt to deconstruct the argument in opposition to the building of the center. Notice which source you believe more, which source is more credible, why that particular source is more credible, and in the end ultimately, no matter how you feel on the issue, does the source make a persuasive argument, why or why not?
For the first video you have to click on the link (the title): Controversial Mosque in Manhattan
Here is the 2nd video:
