by tommywallach Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:26 am
Hey DJ,
In this argument, Joanna starts off by making a claim without any supporting evidence: Bankrupt companies should stay in their old business upon recovery.
Ruth responds with an example that contradicts this claim.
(A) PERFECT. Ruth presents an example.
(B) Ruth doesn't explain anything, but provides a real-world example.
(C) This makes two errors. First of all, it never mentions that Ruth is responding to another person. Also, this isn't an analogy, it's an example. An analogy is more like a metaphor (for example, if Ruth had responded to Joanna by saying, "But when a relationship goes bad, sometimes you have to come back to that relationship with a totally new attitude and fresh ideas," that would be an analogy--from bankrupt companies to bankrupt relationships.
(D) Ruth never discusses any ambiguities present in Joanna's argument.
(E) This would be a great way to argue, but it's not what Ruth does. She presents a real-world example.
Hope that helps!
-t