- **Dyphemism** - negative expressions (humiliating/disapproving)
- **Ad hominem** - personal attack
-## Example essays
+## Aristotelian Appeals
+
+- **Logos** - logic, reasoning
+- **Ethos** - character, ethics, authority
+- **Pathos** - emotion, anecdotes
+
+## Structure of arguments
+
+- Order of arguments
+
+### Introductions
+
+### Endings
+
+- Call to action/leaving audience with hope
+
+
+### Segregating discussion
+
+- beginning/middle/end
+- look for tonal shifts
+- consider language techniques & transitions between them
+
+
+## Practice responses
+
+### *Pill testing: an indulgence for the elites* - Blake Young
+
+Young begins his piece with a blunt and firm statement, clearly affirming his contention in the first few words. This establishes a bold and confident tone for the author, intended to intimidate readers whilst also presenting a shocking and grabbing statement. Following this, the author expands by discussing general background information of the issue, which adds credibility to the later arguments. The addition context contributed by the second paragraph also broadens the potential audience by engaging those who are less educated or interested in the issue. The author then makes extensive use of metaphors to describe the "strange noise", and then makes a somehwat discriminating generalisation about the "doctors' wives of the leafy suburbs". In the next sentence, he clarifies this, intentionally enclosing the "war on drugs" in quote marks. This is meant to be diminuitive and demeaning towards the opposing idea.
At the start of the next paragraph, Young integrates his personal opinion into the debate ("I have no earthly idea"), whilst further discussing the war on drugs. He does this by guitling readers into submission, referring to "anyone paying attention". This is an example of the generalisation and exaggeration that Young frequnetly uses. Some brief satire supplements this attack with the metaphor of "pillows and nerf guns". This idea is then summarised with a more concise and firm statement criticising politicians - yet another ad hominem attack.
Th next paragraph introduces an appeal to public opinion, leveraging the idea of "herd mentality". This is evident in the emphasis on the community's response to the issue. A specific anecdote is then used, the case of Brett Whitely, which adds further credibility to the author's claim. He describes this anecdote as "wholeheartedly positive", suggesting readers should similarly respect such actions. The opposition is then described as "ferocious", a hypocritical but demeaning statement.
-The conclusion of the article
+### *I ran a police force...* - Michael Palmer
+
+Target audience - educated, parents, non-drug users, people with prior experience with the issue, primarily NSW
+Contention - "Unashamedly a ferocious advocate for reducing the atrauma and damage caused by drug use" - pill testing reduces harm, improves lives of vulnerable people
+
+Supporting arguments
+
+1. There are no silver bullets
+2. Personalise the despair
+3. We are honour bound to do more
+
+Palmer starts his article with an firm but factually-phrased introduction, which helps less educated readers to become invested in the issue and introduces the author's contention. Credibility is gained by the reader from the start of the piece, which is done by citing the "wide support" and "chorus" for the author's opinion. The second example also reveals the use of a metaphor. Following this, rhetorical question is posed, encouraging thought for readers. The words "futile", "exacerbate" and "alleviate" are sophisticated, which creates a spectrum of complexity in author's language, allowing him to appeal to a wider audience. A blunt statement then signifies a more logical and analytical section, including an expert opinion which helps to garner authority. However, Palmer also uses more emotive language, such as the inclusive phrase "a majority of Australians".
+
+Following this, the author states his contention in a more explicit and personal way, using the first person to encourage a personal connection. Strong language is also used to emphasise the author's passion, enforcing that he is "unashamedly a ferocious advocate". This emotional manipulation is further enhanced by the phrase "needless loss of [..] lives". More context is then added to the author's discussion as he adopts a more objective tone, and then compares "bad guys" and "concerned guys" - an example of colloquial and accessible language, once again expanding the piece's readership.
+
+The first major argument in the piece concerning "silver bullets" is intended to create a negative view of the government, whilst also favouring those who take action on the issue. The first sentence gives context, but the phrase "had the courage" is clearly favourable towards the deputy coroner, indicating the relative position of the author's views. The second paragraph introduces the idea of "silver bullet remedies", a metaphor which is familiar to most readers. The consideration of this concept, whilst helping the author's point, also makes readers feel that Palmer is of a considered and analytical viewpoint, adding to his credibility.