During persuasive authorship pieces writers try to do you see their point of position as valid. Often times during this procedure. their authorship is compromised by the mistakes they make to turn out their point. David Thomas makes many mistakes in his essay “The Mind of a Man. ” In his thesis he tries to turn out that adult females are non smarter than work forces as antecedently believed. but alternatively that they merely excel at different undertakings. However. throughout his whole essay. he describes that male childs are discouraged by female instructors and does non lodge to his thesis. He showed a colored point of position that he supported with lone anecdotal grounds and surveies that contained no Numberss or statistics. Besides. his usage of emotion in his essay showed his choler towards others positions that contradicted his.
David Thomas takes a colored point of position in his essay. Throughout many parts of the essay he describes the stereotypes about male childs. saying their trouble to larn decently as a consequence of these stereotypes by frequently utilizing anecdotal grounds. He describes the lower classs male childs were acquiring than misss on the GCSE tests and makes the premise. “The debut of class work into the GCSE course of study appears to prefer misss. who tend to be persevering and less rebellious. ” which has non been proven. or could non be backed up by any kind of statistical or factual information from surveies. He makes this statement presuming that the ground must be that misss receive higher classs because the trial favored them. He does non take into the consideration that possibly the male childs merely didn’t do every bit good for a figure of other grounds that has nil to make with the manner the trials were designed.
In the essay. he continues to demo his colored point of position by citing Tony Mooney. a secondary school schoolmaster. who reinforces his point stating male childs are less advanced than misss because adult females instructors favor misss and do non reenforce male childs because of their “aggressive” and “boisterous” behaviour. Thomas adds this quotation mark that has no factual grounds. it is the sentiment of a school schoolmaster. who certainly can non be present mundane in every individual category to cognize everything that’s traveling on. Thomas quotes Mooney’s boy. who showed a difference in his Markss when taught by a adult female. “Because the work forces instructors ne’er shout at me every bit much as the adult female teachers” is another signifier of anecdotal grounds. This is the feeling of one small male child who can non be compared to society as a whole ( 222 ) .
Thomas continues to seek and turn out his point by adding surveies without any statistics in them and in bend makes many contradictions to things antecedently mentioned in his essay. He includes a survey done at the University of California in which 72 male childs and 60 misss at kindergarten degree learned how to read with a machine. When tested. the misss tonss were less than the boys tonss. Then. when they went back to normal direction by adult females instructors. they were tested once more later and the male childs scored less than the misss.
Equally interesting as these consequences may be. they do non incorporate Numberss to demo how big the difference really was. The difference could be minimum which could be due to a figure of grounds. So. the fact that no statistical grounds was included with the survey did non turn out to be that converting ( 223 ) . Besides. in the beginning of the essay. he states that adult females have been proven to be better at verbal undertakings. which would explicate the ground why they didn’t do every bit good with the machines as the instructors. So he contradicts himself come ining this survey by antecedently demoing why a miss might hold done better on these trials ( 221 ) .
Thomas uses a batch of emotion in his essay to turn out his point. specifically when he talks about the quotation mark he used from Christine Cosker who seemed to confute one of his earlier quotation marks by Mooney. She said. “If misss achieve higher criterions than male childs. it is non the consequence of sympathetic female instructors: it is that boys fail to be motivated because of their attitude to adult females. Boy’s early experience is about wholly one of a society which regards women’s traditional functions as fiddling. dull and mediocre and dismisses their sentiments. If misss have a positive function theoretical account in the female instructor. they will make better than male childs. But if male childs. unencumbered by society’s biass. valued their female instructors. so their advancement would fit that of girls” ( 223 ) . Obviously Cosker felt strongly about her point and proved an alternate account to Mooneys every bit good as Thomas’ theory of female instructors being the cause of the male childs lower classs. Thomas uses irony every bit good to do his choler known.
In reaction to her missive. he states “Heaven forbid that they [ male childs ] should be given any consideration or compassion. Heaven forbid that the biass of the new age should be challenged. If you of all time doubted that women’s rightists have taken over from apoplectic old colonels as the great ultraconservatives of society. merely read this letter” ( 224 ) . If you read between the lines of his irony. you begin to see merely what he is connoting. He is connoting that she didn’t give male childs any compassion or consideration when she was merely saying that if the male childs learned to appreciate their instructors more and see them as more of a function theoretical account it would work towards their advantage. He continues to assail her different point of position by saying them as a “feminists” point of position. In his attempts to seek to do people take his side and believe his ideas he merely discredits himself because alternatively of encompassing the possibility of other causes he merely knocks them down and provinces that they are merely obviously and merely incorrect.
Thomas’ organic structure paragraphs and decision were non connected well to the chief point of his essay. In his thesis. he used a quotation mark from Dr. John Nicholson stating that the IQ tonss from work forces and adult females were “indistinguishable” ( 221 ) . and the lone difference is that they were merely better at different kind of undertakings. Meanwhile. his whole full essay attacked the fact that female instructors don’t back up the male childs and that caused their lower classs. So the information he provided did non back up his thesis.
Besides he ends the decision with a unusual statement that seem to mean a new thesis. His reasoning sentence. “When Yoda sat on his stone in The Empire Strikes Back and told Luke Skywalker that he had to take between the dark force and the visible radiation. he knew what he was speaking about” ( 225 ) . seemed to do small sense and had nil to make with his essay. In composing his essay. he should’ve considered his audience and that some people who did non see the film would non understand what he was connoting. besides that statement seemed more like an gap line instead than a reasoning one.
In order for writers to do you see their point of position as valid. they sometimes compromise the strength of their information. David Thomas did many things to compromise his credibleness in his essay “The Mind of a Man. ” In Thomas’ essay he had a biased position that he supported with anecdotal grounds. He used surveies with no existent figure or statistics to verify them. His usage of emotion in his essay showed his choler towards others positions that contradicted his. Besides. his organic structure paragraphs and decision didn’t seem to be connected to the initial thesis he stated.