[QUOTE=Ozia;729051]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddha
Why are you asking for the proposition arguments? Does existence of proposition arguments warrant the existence of meaningfulness of the term where only opposition arguments hold true?
yes,the existence of at least a few proposition arguments warrant the existence of meaningfulness of the term. khair it is another debate. U said it was a trap but the definition of a trap includes a piece of cake or cheese to attract the prey.I am sorry i cannot find an incentive in this statement by your interpretation. that is why i was asking for proposition arguments.
@roshan.
I agree that it depends on the examiner if he finds one's arguments convincing but again,during css 2013 the examiner was very brutal.
|
As you said Great Nations win without 'struggle' is an extremely stupid statement and it harbors no valid arguments. Then, it will only strengthen the stance of the person writing against the topic!
Let's say I write an essay against the topic Great Nations win without 'struggle', there will be no counter-arguments to deal with and I only have to give my arguments against the topic! Existence of counter-arguments only weaken your stance. For example, there is this essay topic Free Speech should have limitations. No one would argue for Free Speech should have no limitations because that would be absurd! There are no strong arguments for unfettered, unmonitored, libelous and slanderous free speech! In fact counter-arguments in this case don't really exist! Therefore, it won't be an issue to interpret 'fighting' as 'struggle'. Why? because as I mentioned in one of my previous comments, that the word 'fighting' is open to interpretation because it is an ambiguous term. What you're doing is using reductio ad absurdum for justification albeit faulty and throwing out the 'struggle' interpretation of the term on the basis of non-existence of counter-arguments which will only weaken one's stance!!