Defintion Argument — dragon570

2 thoughts on “Defintion Argument — dragon570”

1. Feedback provided
   –DSH

   I wanted to know if I could add/subtract anything to/from my definition argument.

   LikeLike

   Reply

2. A concussion is when a person the brain is bruised because they were hit really hard or hit something really hard. Brain injuries is a very serious decision in sports because players get injured all the time. Inside our skull we have our brain and if that something happens where a persons brain bangs into the skull it could cause some harmful things depending on how hard the brain hit against the skull. Also, the brain is surrounded by fluid and 3 layers that is between the brain and the skull but they only can help to a limit when the brain hits against the skull.

   A definition of “concussion” might be needed for readers who don’t know the simple mechanics of the brain trauma the results from a hard hit, but a technical definition of concussion certainly won’t require 1000 words, Dragon. If you studied the lecture material I provided regarding Definition/Categorical essays, you know the authors of the models were using their 1000 words to argue SOMETHING ELSE—an ethical dilemma, or a policy proposal. If we know that pro football players are suffering concussions, and if you spend a paragraph to educate readers on the mechanics of how they occur in a football collision, then you’ll have 900 words left to define a less obvious term. For example, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/sports/football/03concussion.html?_r=0
   The New York Times ran an article identifying the “new guidelines on concussions.” That article calls our attention to what qualify as “significant signs of a concussion,” what are the “symptoms of concussion,” who are the “independent experts” who can let a player back into a game, what it means to “put a player at risk.” What’s a “abnormal neurological examination”? Here’s another, directly quoting from the article: “On every play there are traumatic experiences to the head. The question is one of degree.” So when does a “traumatic experience” qualify as a “concussion”? Do you see what I’m getting at, Dragon? The terms that should interest you, and which occupy your attention in any persuasive argument, are the terms that require interpretation and about which reasonable people can disagree. —DSH

   Rugby is a sport that involves no pads, and older versions of the American football helmets from back in the day. Rugby is played around the world from America, New Zealand, Japan to list a few. People say rugby is like American football but without pads, however, that is not the case the difference is:

   They use a different method for tackling a player that has the ball.
   The ball is shaped differently than the American football.
   The scoring is different. A “try” (touchdown) is 5 point, instead, of 6 points like the NFL.
   The time of play is not split into 4 quarters instead it’s split into 2 halves.
   The equipment that rugby players wear is different from the NFL’s equipment.

   The only parts of your description of rugby that is essential to an argument about the relative safety or danger of football and rugby would be the “different method of tackling” and the “different equipment.” Any difference that doesn’t contribute to head trauma variations is a meaningless comparison for the purposes of your argument. Is that clear? —DSH

   LikeLike

   Reply