Part One
A claim is a statement that needs to be supported by an argument.
Support is reasons that allow the audience to believe that a certain claim is true. This could also be considered a part of the argument.
Evidence is factual information that can be used in the argument to prove the claim.
Explanation is a description of the support and evidence to ensure that the argument is understood.
Part Two
1.Crichton’s argument gives me a negative feeling because I am a religious person and believe in the fantasy and stories from the bible. In the article, he was trying to say that we should ignore the make believe and looks at the facts and scientific information. It really stuck out to me that he wanted to distinguish the reality from the religious view.
2.I would say that Crichton’s tone is this article is a negative one. He believes that fantasy, from religion, should be distinguished from reality and is trying to convince the reader that his belief is correct and that society should function that way.
3. Crichton’s main claim is that public policies on the environment should be based on science of environmentalism rather than the religion of environmentalism.
4. Chrichton supports his claim by using people and how they live as support. He uses examples such as how people think they are experiencing nature when they spend a few days in a cabin and in reality they have experienced none to the outdoor nature they way a person would if they stayed in the forest. This evidence supports his claim because it shows how people have created their own image of what they think it is like to experience nature when in reality it is something completely different.
5. Chrichton does not site his sources because he says that they are religious and that this comes from faith and is not dependent on fact. I don’t agree with this. I think that if he were to site his sources, there would be a better chance that the reader would strongly agree with his claim.
6. I don’t think that Chrichton’s argument is strong. I think that there should be more reason to support the fact that it is better to base public policy decisions on science rather than religion.