Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A typical DBQ is a packet of several original sources (anywhere from three to sixteen), labeled by letters (beginning with "Document A" or "Source A") or numbers. Usually all but one or two source(s) are textual, with the other source(s) being graphic (usually a political cartoon , map , or poster if primary and a chart or graph if secondary).
However, students may begin writing during this time; most students take notes on the documents in order to plan out the DBQ. Students are advised to spend 45 minutes writing the DBQ and then 40 writing the LEQ, but there are no rules on when each essay must be worked on. There are three prompts for the LEQ, but only one needs to be chosen.
Not all single-purpose accounts are bad, and they do not all violate Wikipedia policy. When an account is brand new, it is possible that it has been used initially to edit just a single page or a group of related pages. But in the future, it'll be used to perform other edits that are barely related or not related at all.
In the IRAC method of legal analysis, the "issue" is simply a legal question that must be answered. An issue arises when the facts of a case present a legal ambiguity that must be resolved in a case, and legal researchers (whether paralegals, law students, lawyers, or judges) typically resolve the issue by consulting legal precedent (existing statutes, past cases, court rules, etc.).
A valid logical argument is one in which the conclusion is entailed by the premises, because the conclusion is the consequence of the premises. The philosophical analysis of logical consequence involves the questions: In what sense does a conclusion follow from its premises? and What does it mean for a conclusion to be a consequence of premises ...
If there is a single chain of claims containing at least one intermediate conclusion, the argument is sometimes described as a serial argument or a chain argument. [11] Statement 4 is an intermediate conclusion or sub-conclusion. Each of these structures can be represented by the equivalent "box and line" approach to argument maps.
The conclusion is rephrased to look different and is then placed in the premises. — Paul Herrick [ 2 ] For example, one can obscure the fallacy by first making a statement in concrete terms, then attempting to pass off an identical statement, delivered in abstract terms, as evidence for the original. [ 17 ]
If P is sufficient for Q, then knowing P to be true is adequate grounds to conclude that Q is true; however, knowing P to be false does not meet a minimal need to conclude that Q is false. The logical relation is, as before, expressed as "if P, then Q" or "P ⇒ Q". This can also be expressed as "P only if Q", "P implies Q" or several other ...