Matt Lamkin’s “A Ban On Brain-Boosting Drugs is Not the Answer” first appeared in Chronicle of Higher Education in 2011. In this essay Lamkin aims to convince his reader not to deter improper conduct with threats, but to encourage students to engage in the practice of education. Lamkin tells us “If colleges believe that enhancing cognition with drugs deprives students of the true value of education, they must encourage students to adapt that value as their own” (642). Appeal to logic, consistency, and compare/contrast are techniques Lamkin skillfully uses to create a strong effective essay.
Lamkin uses logos, or appeal to logic, by using effective and valid evidence, such as statistics and observations of credible source. By doing this Lamkin establishes the problem, and gives credibility toward an effective essay. On the other hand he creates balance by using an opposing solution from a credible source. Lamkin states “34 percent of university’s undergraduates have used stimulants like Ritalin and Adderall as study aids” (640). By using this statistic he states there is a logical problem that legitimately needs a solution. Then Lamkin says “Wesleyan University amended its student’s code of conduct to recognize “misuse” of prescription drugs as a violation” (641). By representing this observation by the university Lamkin gives credibility toward his essay, and also gives give’s balance by giving an opposing argument. All and all by using logos Lamkin creates a convincing argument.
Shortly after Lamkin captures the reader’s interest by using logos, or logical appeal, he begins using consistency. Consistency is the constant repeat of the writer’s beliefs. Lamkin does this by constantly reiterating “college need to encourage students to engage more deeply in college education rather than to seek shortcuts” (641). What he is basically trying to say over and over again is we should put the students on right path instead of punishing them for...
Cited: Lamkin, Matt. “A Ban On Brain-Boosting Drugs is Not the Answer”. Practical Argument: A Text and Anthology. 2nd ed. Eds. Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2014. 640-642. Print.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document