Claim 2 provides more sound arguments as it considers the historical context and benefits of plastic usage. It highlights the environmental impact of using paper products, such as tree consumption, and emphasizes practical advantages like cost savings, food preservation, and safety. While Claim 1 raises important concerns about plastic pollution and the need for alternatives, it does not fully acknowledge the complexities of the issue. By proposing a ban without proposing suitable replacements or addressing the benefits of plastic, Claim 1 lacks the depth of understanding present in Claim 2. A balanced approach that takes into account both the environmental impact of plastic and its practical advantages is crucial for finding a sustainable solution.
Claim 1 What do you think about when you toss a plastic bag into the garbage? If you’re like most people, then you probably do not think about much at all. We don’t think about the fact that plastic bags take centuries to decay. We do not think about how many bags end up in lakes, rivers, and oceans, harming wildlife and even causing death. However, we should think about all this. Better yet, we should do something about it: ban the use of plastic bags. If this happens, then we will all feel better knowing that we are not contributing to pollution and harming wildlife. And besides, plastic bags are not a necessity. Paper bags are an alternative, and so are reusable cloth bags. Claim 2 It seems like we are drowning in plastic bags, but before you decide to ban them, you should remember some of the reasons companies started using plastic back in the 1970s. Before there was plastic, there was paper and cardboard, which are made from trees. So, switching from paper to plastic saved some trees. Plastic also saved people money because it kept food fresher for longer. Also, it is lighter than cardboard or glass, so it was cheaper to ship things wrapped in plastic. Plus, plastic is safer than glass, which tends to break. So, yes, we should be using less plastic, but it does not make sense to ban it until we find a better solution. Which paragraph provides more sound arguments? Why or why not? Write 3-5 sentences supporting your answer.
1 answer