This article, written by Ben Stein, is about a new proposed
law that would take effect in Florida. Basically this proposed law ban that
teachers or students from teaching or discussing any theory of creation other
than Darwinism. Stein starts off with a
series of questions that draws your attention to the fact that it is not easy
to prove Darwinism. He claims that you can assume one theory, but that there is
next to no proof for either. He
continues to say that if something is not verifiable, that we or our government
should not impose limitations on other theories. Stein even uses analogies by comparing our government
to “worse than Stalin-ism”. He does this
to help him prove that even Stalin respected knowledge, and only limited other
rights. He continues to say that this
law is a direct attack against our ability to learn, and therefore violates the
first amendment. This analogy does prove
a point to his audience. It may be
slightly exaggerated, but doing this actually furthers his point. It shows how much he is against this proposed
law and that he doesn’t want to accept it. Stein admits that he is not an
expert on this, but still manages to dispute the proposed law by using a
logical order of thought. You can tell that he spent the time on this and
really thought out what he was going to say before he actually did
anything. This achieves its purpose and resonates well
with Steins intended audience.
Good analysis, Tyler. Remember, please, to list the title of the article in the beginning of your post. Otherwise, your readers won't have any context...
ReplyDelete