Many people try to avoid arguing because they do not like conflict. Still, an argument does not need to be nasty. In fact, it is an excellent opportunity to share different opinions about a topic. Strong arguments are based on reason and logic. In an effective argument, you state a claim, present reasons to show why the claim is valid, and then provide evidence to prove that the reasons make sense.

Question

Many people try to avoid arguing because they do not like conflict. Still, an argument does not need to be nasty. In fact, it is an excellent opportunity to share different opinions about a topic. Strong arguments are based on reason and logic. In an effective argument, you state a claim, present reasons to show why the claim is valid, and then provide evidence to prove that the reasons make sense.
Read the two arguments below. Which do you think is more effective?

Argument 1

Katya: Of course, folk music is better than rock music! It’s more fun to sing, and you don’t need instruments. Anybody can sing it.

Harper: That’s crazy! Folk music is so old-fashioned. Nobody listens to it anymore. I like pop music much better.

Argument 2

Katya: Folk music deserves respect because it is one of the oldest forms of music. It has been around for centuries! It lasts because it expresses universal ideas and themes, and it doesn’t require you to know how to play an instrument.

Harper: Even though I’m not a big fan of folk music, I agree with the points you made. In addition, I think that some pop music is based on folk music, so folk has value.

The second argument is more effective. There, Katya makes a claim about folk music and backs it up with a reason and some evidence. This evidence persuades Harper to agree that folk music deserves respect and has value.

Which argument is more effective, and why?
please use sentences, not points

GPT-4 Turbo · Answer

The second argument is more effective because it embodies the qualities of a well-reasoned discussion, utilizing logic and evidence to support its claims. In this argument, Katya presents a rationale for why folk music is valuable, highlighting its enduring nature and cultural significance as one of the oldest music forms. She underscores its accessibility and the way it conveys universal ideas without the necessity of instrumental skills. This reasoned approach facilitates a constructive response from Harper, who, despite personal preferences, acknowledges the merit in Katya's argument and recognizes the influence of folk music on contemporary genres.

In contrast, the first argument lacks substance and is primarily composed of subjective opinions with neither party offering a solid foundation for their preferences. It devolves into a personal preference debate rather than a reasoned argument, with neither participant effectively persuading the other or engaging in meaningful dialogue about the topic at hand.