What mistakes should be avoided when presenting an argument and why are these important?
As a recent University of Phoenix MBA program graduate, I would like to share some of the discussions from my experience with the University. These discussion questions are here to give you an idea of what to expect during the program. Of course, they are meant to encourage your own thoughts and responses. Please, please, don't simply turn in my work as your own. That's just obnoxious... and it's plagiarism, which will get you expelled from the University.
Also, please have a look at an excerpt from the course syllabus below... compare to your own to ensure that you are, in fact, following the proper course.
This is Week 1, Discussion Question 3 of MGT/521, v5.
Week 1, Discussion Question 3
What mistakes should be avoided when presenting an argument and why are these important in developing effective arguments? Be sure to provide specific examples.
Presentation of the entire argument: One must present all sides of an argument without bias so as to allow the reader to receive the argument neutrally. The reader may then decide which side of the argument to take, if any, as a well informed party.
Omission: One must not omit any portion of information in the interest of bias. Additionally, the source of information presented to any side of the argument must be reliable and qualified in order to represent a valuable contribution to the topic.
Context: One must clearly understand the context of cited information and convey it in a manner that will allow the reader the same clear understanding. Improper application of source material may often result in a skewed perception of the source's intent and method of delivery.
Citation: One must provide accurate citation(s) to support any argumentative position. While quoting a source of information is simple, quoting it accurately and without alteration may be slightly more challenging. Accurate citation (particularly in original format, if possible) ensures that the reader is able to receive the source information without a preconceived bias from the presenter.
Personal example: I was informed some time ago of a person's death. Due to that person's (questionable) habits and life style, the "assumed" cause of death was nothing close to the actual cause. The presenters were somewhat misinformed themselves, some unknowingly omitting information that was rather valuable to this discussion while others did so in the interest of sharing their own assumptions. Until discussing the matter with people that were most involved in the deceased's life while evaluating proper context and validity of the information, I had very little understanding of the situation. As with any other argument, this situation proved that proper presentation of factual information is key in an unbiased position.