There is a blog that I recently read that I found to be informative and yet also very unappealing at the same time. I made the following comment to the blog. : "Although I find the information shared in this blog very informative I also can see how the information shared could come across as not only unappealing but also difficult to understand. Not super difficult to understand at all just lengthy and on such a touchy topic I find it important that one catches the reader with their point right of the bat. It is not who is involved or what they are discussing but how it is being presented to those reading it. Although I can not personally agree with every statement and decision made based on my own personal values I will say that I find the argument persuasive and interesting. However, I have to go as far as to say that if you are going to discuss such a sensitive topic with so much force and expect people who need to hear it to not only read it but actually get a understanding of why it is that your information is important you have to bring it a little bit closer to easy understanding and therefore go straight to making your point understood to all that read it."
I would strongly suggest that others read this blog as it is interesting and give their opinion as it is informative as to how many different views there are on certain situations that people would rather run from than have a intelligent conversation about. Not everything has to be an argument would have to be my ultimate suggestion. :)
Check it out: Babies, babies, babies rights?
The Ears have been listening and they've been piqued to a comment on my previous article that was left by a colleague - The writer of Politically Texas. Her view was positive but critical and raised some points that I thought I should justify as well as others that were legitimate writing concerns! Firstly, to address what I would consider a legitimate writing concern is the obvious lack of and introductory paragraph that summarized my intent. I do believe that my mini-essay could (and should) contain an introductory paragraph that briefly expresses my position. That being said, another contention was the length of my article and I believe that this requires justification. The length of my article is primarily due to the substantive nature of the journal article I reviewed. The article I reviewed was a concise neonatal medical ethics overview; since we are not in a medical ethics course, I thought it was pertinent to discuss the nature and context of the argument the author puts forward. Also, the author's background is a salient feature of the article. The article is not written by a science academician or even a healthcare professional. This changes how the article reads substantially and makes it that much more powerful. Normally such a thing would detract from the author's credibility; however, she has done considerable research and is well respected in the neonatal-ethics community. If I had left these pieces out of my review it would have severely detracted from both my argument and my credibility.
ReplyDeleteRegarding length I believe an overly dense piece of writing detracts from its quality. It is more important to analyze what an article says, the point it makes, and how concisely it can make that point.
This is DW signing out!