Argument Article

Argument Article

Summary of Articles

In the article “Should Rivers Have Rights? A Growing Movement Says It’s About Time” Lynch suggests that rivers need to be given rights similar to those people have. The main problem resulting in the degradation of rivers is the lack of rights that protect rivers. Nonetheless, the development of rights should help develop a better allocation system and prevent the overuse and degradation of rivers.

In the article “What the Environment Needs Water Markets," Lund provides an argument where he claims that environmental regulations have so far been effective in the preservation of the environment but have been unable to address environmental management and restoration. As such, the main premise advanced by Lund is that the only water allocation system is through the development of water markets Argument Article.Water markets are more flexible and have strategies that can enhance environmental management without necessarily relying on regulations.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Article by Lynch

Ideas are unfolded naturally. This rule dictates that each sentence should pave the way for the next sentence. The argument moves from reason to evidence that supports the claims. From the beginning of this article, the argument moves coherently. Each sentence lays the foundation for the next sentence. Reason and evidence are provided. The organization within each paragraph moves the argument smoothly. For instance, the argument moves from the topic sentence, which lays the foundation for the supporting sentences through proper arguments founded on evidence. The article finds its strength in resolving premises and conclusions. A premise is made at the beginning of each argument that helps develop a concise conclusion based on the need to develop rights for the rivers.

The greatest weakness of this article is that not every paragraph begins from a reliable premise. The kind of premise used to start some paragraphs results in the development of weak conclusions. Each paragraph should have a strong premise that can help in the development of a concise conclusion. In the paragraph talking about the Mapuche nation, the beginning of this paragraph is weak, so its ending is weak.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Article 2 by Lund

This article has multiple strengths based on the rules of short arguments. Each paragraph has its premise that results in the development of a strong conclusion. Every paragraph is developed from a reliable premise. The argument provided is concrete and concise. Lund avoids the use of vague and abstract words. All the paragraphs are brief and straight to the point, making it more comfortable for a reader to understand the main arguments without getting bored or lost in the middle of the argument. Lund builds on substance and no overtone. The Overtone is general, making it challenging for the reader to understand the main argument within a narrative. A lot can be said about water management and how the only way to manage water is through water markets Argument Article. Multiple arguments have been availed within the narrative by Lund.

The main weakness is the lack of source citation within the narrative. Lund makes many claims as he strives to support the idea that water markets can be more effective than environmental regulations. Although some arguments are basic and do not necessitate citations, some parts require substantial sources and citations, lacking within the entire argument.

Fallacies

Hasty generalization. Authors will often integrate the hasty generalization to develop a conclusion that suits their intended expectation without providing sufficient data to back up the claims. This is a common fallacy integrated within most essays where part of the argument is based on an assumption. Here, a fact or opinion is stated without backup claims to support the claims, such as examples or statistics. One of the hasty generalizations is made developed by Lynch when he claims that every watershed has multiple spirits that protect it. Lynch advances the argument by claiming that once a dam or river is contaminated, the spirits leave the watershed. Whereas this is a viable argument, there lacks sufficient information to show and prove spirits that protect the water. Furthermore, no examples of explanation are provided to show the relationship between spirits and water and how they are affected by the contamination of water. Lynch also notes that the spirits’ departure is often a negative aspect since it sees people within the surroundings of a watershed suffer. This is a hasty generalization with no claims to back it up, showing how the people suffer because the spirits have left. The connection between the people, land, water, and the spirits and how they depend on each other fails to be accounted for, making this a claim based on an assumption.

A genetic fallacy has also been incorporated in Lynch’s argument. This type of fallacy describes any given conclusion founded on the thought that the origin of an idea determines its nature. In the argument developed by Lynch, the central argument is that the idea from the Western concerning the use of water has contributed significantly to the challenges the people from Chile are experiencing. The origin of the idea used to advance this argument is the Western view concerning watersheds. Because their idea is wrong, when applied to Chile, the argument becomes wrong and develops the current nature.

The Ad populum fallacy has been utilized by Lund in his argument concerning water markets. In an ad populum fallacy, an appeal representing the thoughts of many individuals is made and used to persuade the intended audience to think similarly. Most environmental thinkers believe that environmental regulations have not been efficient in preventing the challenges facing watersheds and the use of water Argument Article.This is a well-known notion since the environmental regulations have not solved the preexisting problem of reinstatement of native species. In terms of environmental management, the developed environmental regulations have been ineffective, which is why water operation continues to face a crisis.

Water Allocation System

In the article by Lynch, the main argument is that rivers should be treated like people. This is the allocating system that can help counter the challenges of the continuous degradation of watersheds. The river can be represented within a court proceeding since it has rights. Through its rights, an appropriate allocation system that preserves the rivers is put in place. In contrast, the article by Lund proposes the use of water markets. According to Lund, water markets can go beyond the barriers that environmental regulations cannot cross. Water markets are more flexible, enabling them to reach more people, and water allocation is done appropriately without any degradation.

Stronger Argument

The stronger argument is the one advanced by Lund concerning water markets. Water markets are more flexible than any regulations developed to protect the environment. Due to their flexible nature, they provide a mechanism in which the environment’s effectiveness is enhanced. Reallocation of water is made easier, which is currently the main challenge.

References

Should Rivers have rights? (Links to an external site.) Yale360 https://e360.yale.edu/features/should-rivers-have-rights-a-growing-movement-says-its-about-time

Why the Environment Needs Water Markets (Links to an external site.). 17 Jan 2017. Lund, Jay. News Deeply. https://deeply.thenewhumanitarian.org/water/community/2017/01/17/why-the-environment-needs-water-markets