Silko’s Case

Does Silko acknowledge views about the subject that are different from her own? What is Silko’s attitude towards those who hold different views? Evaluate how well Silko includes and responds to an opposing point of view.

* Silko does briefly acknowledge views different from her own and her attitude is negative toward them. She refers to immigration policies as racist. She thinks US Government waste a lot of money trying to close the border and it’s not working people still crossing the border. She says that” the great migration within the Americas cannot be stopped; human beings are natural forces of the Earth, just as rivers and winds are natural forces.

Analyze and evaluate Silko’s credibility and authority—her ETHOS appeal. (Review the notes for ETHOS in The Appeals folder on Blackboard.) Find specific examples in the text to support your analysis and evaluation.

* The fact that Silko was raised on a reservation and has personal experience with border patrol check points gives her essay credibility.Silko and her companion Gus were traveling south from Albuquerque, when they were stopped by the Border Patrol.The agents ordered them to step out of their car.Silko said the she will never forget that night beside the highway,that she could sense a feeling of violence and menace.She compares her experience to a report she read on the Argentine police officers who became addicted to interrogation, torture, and the murder that followed. She thought how easy it would be for the Border Patrol to shoot us and leave our bodies and car beside the highway, like so many bodies found in these parts and ascribed to drug runners.

What are the strongest and most persuasive parts of Silko’s argument? Where is her argument weak and what suggestions do you have for making her argument more persuasive?

Silko’s most persuasive points are made when she describes how the border patrol dog seemed to hate her handlers and refused to serve them. Also when she compares the construction of a steel wall along sections of the border with the “Iron Curtain” and again when she describes the people on the freight train showing that people still move across the border. Silko’s argument is weak that she doesn’t mentioned the affect that illegal immigrants put on taxpayers.Maybe if she can show more US citizens are on welfare or using government assistance then illegal immigrants that would make her argument more persuasive.

What are your reactions and questions regarding the NARRATIVE style of argument? (Review the notes in the Kinds of Arguments folder on Blackboard.) As a style of argument, do you find it persuasive? What does or doesn’t make it work?

This example of narrative argument is persuasive. What makes it works is believability of the author’s personal experience,but for that same reason it’s seems biased.

What were your questions and reactions as you read Silko’s essay?

Silko talks about her personal experience with Border Patrol, but what about the drugs and weapons and criminals who are trying to cross the border? She never talks about that. My reaction as I read Silko’s essay it may be inconvenient and humiliating for some people but it’s for the protection of the country, because if regular people can cross the border, then what about criminals and terrorists?

Comp IName:
Prof. Juel
Silko

Link to Silko’s essay (the link is also in the syllabus that you can open on Blackboard): http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tw/09-26-96/cover.htm

Write or type your answers to the following questions and turn in your work for a grade. Be clear in your statements and evaluations. Use a mix of quotes and paraphrase from the text to support your analysis and evaluations.

8 Read Silko’s essay, “The Border Patrol State.” Identify her main and secondary claims, list the primary reasons that she provides, and summarize some of the key pieces of evidence that she provides.

* Silkos’s main claim is that the United States government is still persecuting Native American people and denying them the right to travel freely. One of her secondary claims is that the U.S. border areas are like a “police state” where border police and immigration officials routinely stop and detain people based on their appearance. Another secondary claim is that the border with Mexico does not work and never has. She says that people are a “natural force” and will continue to move across the border despite the millions of dollars spent to stop them.

9 Evaluate Silko’s LOGOS appeal. Are her reasons valid? Are her assumptions reasonable and fair? How convincing is the evidence she presents? Is it reliable? Sufficient? Is it biased?

* Her reasons are valid. She grew up believing the freedom to travel was her right , but she experience otherwise. I don’t think all of her assumptions reasonable and fair, because she assumes that all Border Patrolman are unreasonably rude and angry because of her personal experience. Her evidence is pretty convincing, reliable and sufficient, but I believe it is slightly biased because of her own personal experience. *

10 Describe Silko’s intended audience and the purpose for her argument. What clues lead you to this conclusion? How persuasive do you think Silko’s argument is to her intended audience?

* I believe Silko’s intended audience is the people of the United States and her purpose is to support more relaxed border enforcement and immigration policies. Her statement that during Spanish and Mexican rule of the Southwest “no attempts were made to interfere with the flow of people and goods from South to North and North to South” is an indication of this purpose.