Exercise 15: At your discretion (p. 20)
Mr Simon’s main contention: Mr Simon advocates the rights of parents to smack their children. (supports/recommends/defends/approves of/justifies/champions)
Most important points : (logical development of argument)
- A smack gives children a moral direction and teaches them right from wrong. It sets appropriate boundaries and deters children from disobedient and unruly behaviour. (Note the moral appeal and assumptions.)
- In the face of extreme danger, a smacking could be a life-saving measure.
Appeals to morals : smacking sets parental/moral boundaries. (Mr Simon uses euphemisms to condone the harsh affects of smacking and focus on the love/care aspects. These words are used to justify/rationalise smacking.
Evidence : the author uses a combination of evidence/facts : he incorporates his own professional observations and corroborates this evidence with some peer/expert comments and the results of surveys of parental attitudes.
Use of logic/reason :
Cause and effect reasoning strategies : if parents do not smack, children they will become spoilt.
Assumptions : children will become spoilt , «a generation of spoilt brats » if the children are not smacked. (taps into parental fears)
Rebuttal-style attacking tactics : Mr Simon counters the views of his opponents who contend that smacking teaches violence and that children must be free to make mistakes. Mr Simon counters this by suggesting that smacking is a “loving and caring” part of parenthood : it only teaches violence when done inappropriately. He uses euphemistic language to justify smacking.
- Return to Exercise 15: At your discretion
- Further: See Exercise 15: At Your Discretion, p. 20. Prose paragraphs: Become an Expert