Here's a Generation Wanting to Be Heard by Merrington - Article Example

Name: Tutor: Course name & code: Date: Evaluative Essay The author of the article,” Here’s a generation wanting to be heard” argues that youth in Australia are passionate, forward-thinking youngsters who are concerned about social issues and development. In fact, he argues that youth in Australia debate about global and local issues of great significance to development at every single opportunity they get. Be it in the locker rooms, in classrooms or in less formal stings. The argument is contrary to popular belief among the Australian adults and political class who stereotype youths as selfish and ignorant individuals who are less concerned about issues that do not involve drugs, fashion or music (Merrington, 2004). The author is the view that youths are mistakenly labeled as lazy for various reasons as this analysis will outlay. He blames the mainstream media for portraying youths as destructive and negative, a fact that is believed unquestionably by the older generation. He blames the media for not giving any emphasis to issues affecting the youth thus contributing significantly to the youth being disillusioned and disconnected to national issues. The author is of the opinion that youths do not concern themselves with national issues because nobody is interested in their opinion on such issues. The youth behave the way they do because it is what the society has already made them believe that it is what is expected from them. The article gives an example of a youth who is a perfect driver but justifies any stupid mistake and or offense by the fact that his is a youth and is expected to be a goon (Merrington, 2004). In the essay, the author strives to negate the popular opinion about youths in Australia. The aged individuals and the political class view youths as people who are incapable of engaging in constructive debates and conversations revolving around national issues, a fact that the author denies and instead argues to the contrary. According to him, the youths in the country have been denied an opportunity to make their voice count in national debates and they are therefore assumed to be selfish and unconcerned about issues that do not directly affect them. This critical review essay will strive to analyze the argument of Louise Merrington. It will focus on the effectiveness of the article in bringing across the main points of the author as well as its effectiveness in convincing a reader that the author’s side of view of the issue is in fact the true opinion. The essay is based on premises that youths in Australia are not lazy nor they disconnected from social issues. Also, the author alludes to the fact that it is a lack of opportunity to air their views and after airing them, someone actually listening to the opinions. Based on that, he concludes that contrary to popular opinion, youths in Australia are forward-thinking and idealistic enough to want to make the world a better place. The author argues by analogy that Australian youths, unlike youths of different countries where they are considered concerned and vibrant about national issues, lack an opportunity to air their views to decision makers (Dr Paul Healy 35,2014). The primary subject to the author is the involvement of youth in issues assumed to be important for the good of the nation, for instance, philanthropy, and economic development and security among other issues. The analogue in this context is the fact that youths are mistakenly stereotyped as lazy and ignorant to pertinent issues. The author compares the youth in Australia who are often viewed as hooligans and not interested in issues that affect their nation to youths in other countries that take part in national debates and conversations. He alludes to the fact that youths in those in those other countries play key role in determining the direction taken on social and economic issues. He brings out the difference between these two groups of youths to be the opportunity to vent and air their views. Another difference between the two groups of youths is the fact that in Australia, the mainstream media has stereotyped all youths as lazy and arrogant and has been successful in making individual believe their opinion about the youth as opposed to mainstream media which the author alludes that it does not show the youth in negative light thus giving the nation an opportunity to draw their own conclusions about the youth as opposed to drawing such conclusions for them. The argument by analogy is however weak because the author only alludes to the youths in different parts of the world that are not considered lazy. His argument focuses on side of the coin. It brings out the experience of the youths in Australia while only alluding to the different experiences and circumstances encountered by youths in different parts of the world. The premises used by the author fall short of sealing a water tight argument necessary for a deductive conclusion. The argument is follows an inductive pattern. It brings out a probability that Australian youths are considered lazy, ignorant are disconnected with social issues because the mainstream media in the country paints such a picture about them. Further, the article induces that youths in Australia are considered lazy and goons who are incapable of contributing positive ideas to national debate simply because they are not provided with an opportunity to vent their views and opinions on such issues. This evaluation rules out this article putting across a deductive argument because basing on the premises put forward by the author the conclusion drawn must not necessarily be true. The deductive validity of the conclusion put across by the author is weak and may be challenged in an instance where the explanations put forward to justify the conclusion do not necessarily prove true or are influenced by other issues that the author may have overlooked (Dr Paul Healy 40, 2014). It is critical to analyze the relevance of the premises in justifying the conclusion put across by the author. It is important to remember that an irrelevant fallacy cannot provide sufficient support to a conclusion making it logically acceptable. The explanations of the author are positively relevant to each other in providing a basis for the conclusion to hold water. The statement that youths are not lazy are only lazy because they have not been provided an opportunity to prove themselves otherwise is positively relevant to the fact that youths are mistakenly perceived as ignorant to social and national issues. The essay conforms to the ARG conditions for premise acceptability (Dr Paul Healy 28, 2014). The premise put forward by the author are easily believable to a reasonable reader and thus are acceptable. The premises are extremely relevant to the conclusion and thus form a strong justifiable argument. The author supports his premise by testimony which adds on to their credibility and effectiveness in the argumentative essay. He points out an example where he makes an honest mistake on the road even being a competent driver but uses the stereotype against youths in the country to justify his mistake. He also alludes to a group of students, who in fact talk about their experiences of racism, working with the elderly and disabled, helping starving children around the world which is an example that supports his contrary opinion that youths are ignorant. The author, however, does not back his claims by relevant authority either academic or otherwise. Therefore, his opinion cannot be taken to be a true expert opinion because his specialization on matters relating to the youth and the challenges they encounter is in doubt. The author does not mention that he is a youthful individual and thus expressing his opinion from experience and may raise issues of credibility to the underlying topic under examination. The authors claim and justifications for the same are examples of posteriori truths. The truth of the conclusion is dependent on the truth of the premises. Therefore, the premises of put forward by the author are proper justification for the conclusion he puts forward on the manner in which youths are perceived in Australia and the part they play in national politics and debates. This evaluation lauds the article by Louise Merrington because the author successfully managed to standardize the argument. Thus, making it clear to the reader the point he is trying to sell to the reader. The author begins by protesting that youths are not taking part in issues that are assumed to linked to national building. He goes on to systematically to state his explanations that back up his argument. It is also vital to note the fact that the author’s argument is well reasoned and represents a logical attempt to justify the conclusion that youths in Australia are lazy and less concerned about national issues. The argument of lack of opportunity to express views is brought out as one issue that is critical to the misconception surrounding the notion that youths are lazy. Further, the argument that the opinion directed at youths that they are thieves and hooligans is explained to have been derived from a stereotype propagated by mainstream media is seemingly well thought out and could easily be taken to be true justification for the author’s argument. The argument is clear and devoid of any ambiguity or vagueness. The premise has been constructed in such a manner that they only indicate that the youths of Australia are not lazy and disconnected from reality. The premises and choice of words by the author are precise and devoid of vagueness. Therefore, the author bring out clearly the intended meaning without confusing the reader with any other meaning that may be drawn from his explanations and arguments. Although the explanations and argument does not present a water tight case as to why youths in Australia are considered to be lazy and less involved in national issues, the author has done a remarkable job in developing a logical conclusion that is sufficient to convince any reasonable reader to view the topic from the author’s point of view. However, several weaknesses may be drawn from the argument. The credibility of the authors is in question and it is critical in determining whether or not the audience will take his argument to be true based on the writers knowledge and, or experience. The article is silent on the author’s qualifications and whether or not he is part of the group that the essay seeks to portray in a different light. Thus, it is difficult to establish whether the author is making his case based on his professional understanding or personal experience. The argument of the author uses an inductive approach to draw its conclusion and thus the truth of the conclusion is based on the probability that the premises are in fact true. The author may have adopted a deductive approach to put forward a water-tight case that even any critic would have no option but to agree with the argument. A deductive argument implies a conclusion is in fact valid if the premises are true (Dr Paul Healy 30, 2014). In conclusion, the author has presented a positive argument that is not only clear and logical but also well organized. By the end of the article, the reader empathizes with the youth in Australia for being stereotyped and being denied a chance to voice their opinion on issues of a national importance. It is marred by several challenges as the evaluation has clearly stipulated but the author has still managed to express his thoughts clearly and will managed to convince any reasonable reader to view the topic from the opinion of the author. References Read More