Journal #5

Journal #5 – from Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” (p.95-6)

1. Identify the specific argument that Paine is making in each paragraph. For each of the arguments, identify whether Paine is making an emotional, ethical, or logical appeal and suggest an effective counterargument.

#1 the harder the conflict, the greater the triumph; all power should be to god, it is not to Britain if something should be taxed of not. It will be tough but we must go to war; the victory will be great. This focuses on good feelings that will come out of triumph. Emotional

#2 god will not give up on us people,; A king (of Britain) can’t save and guide us like God can; the common man has the same deception as the king. Having faith in God will make them automatically win. This is Belief without proof, which is dogmatic. Paine is showing ‘begging the question’ in this paragraph. A counter argument is that there is no guarantee that god is on their side. Ethical

#3 American will not be happy and content until free from foreign rule. America should be freed now, because if we wait, our children will have to fight. More separation earlier will benefit the children. The children will benefit from this sacrifice. If we do it now, we will fight, and our children will be happy and free. A counter argument is that staying with England can help trade. Also, the children could be able to fight, because they should be the voice of their own generation. There is no proof that the conflict would not drag on until when the children grow up. This argument is based on the assumption that they will win the war, which is begging the question. Emotional, ethical, and Logical appeal.

#4 we cannot make the decision to pardon or punish if we do not know all of the facts. He compares the king to a thief, which is a faulty analogy. ethical

2. Can you identify any of the logical fallacy that we discussed in Paine’s arguments? If so, which ones? Overall, what do you feel are the strengths and weaknesses of Paine’s arguments?

Paine does use a lot of analogies and is still straightforward and blunt. Paine’s arguments all relate something to God. If someone read’s this who is atheist, they may not relate and fully get the point of the argument Paine is making.