Untitled DocumentA warrant is a general principal that serves as a bridge between your claim and your evidence -- it explains how your evidence is both accurate and relevant to your claim. For example, if one claims:The emancipation of Russian peasants was merely symbolic because it didn't improve the material conditions of their daily lives.ElementTextTheClaimWhat are you trying to demonstrate?The emancipation of Russian peasants was merely symbolicThe EvidenceWhat proof do you have?it didn't improve the material conditions of their daily lives.the reader might ask:Even if we assume that your evidence is accurate and that the material conditions of Russian peasants did not improve, why should that lead me to believe your claim that their emancipation was merely symbolic?This questions above underscores that even if both your claim and your evidence are entirely accurate, it is possible to make a weak argument. You must explain why the evidence you are presenting supports the claim you are making.In short, you need to establish a warrant between your claim and your evidenceIn this example, the warrant might be:Whenever a political action fails to improve the lives of those it is alleged to help, we judge that reform to have been only symbolic.The whole argument, then, would read: The emancipation of Russian peasants was merely symbolic because it didn't improve the material conditions of their daily lives. Whenever a political action fails to improve the lives of those it was supposed to help, we judge that reform to have been only symbolic rather than substantial. ElementTextTheClaimWhat are you trying to demonstrate?The emancipation of Russian peasants was merely symbolicThe EvidenceWhat proof do you have?it didn't improve the material conditions of their daily livesThe WarrantWhy do you think that your proof is relevant to your claim?Whenever a political action fails to improve the lives of those it was supposed to help, we judge that reform to have been only symbolic rather than substantial.Let's take a look at another fairly simple example from the world of sports:Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player who ever lived. Jordan was selected as the greatest basketball player of the 20th century by Sports Illustrated magazine. Since professional basketball has only been played in the 20th century, and since no basketball player was rated higher than Jordan in the survey, Jordan must be the greatest player whoever lived.ElementTextTheClaimWhat are you trying to demonstrate?Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player who ever livedThe EvidenceWhat proof do you have?Jordan was selected as the greatest basketball player of the 20th century by Sports Illustrated magazineThe WarrantWhy do you think that your proof is relevant to your claim?Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player who ever livedLet's look at an example of a point supported by a quotation that might have come from a student paper.If I wanted to argue that Gandhi thought modern Western civilization was corrupt specifically because of its promotion of material greed, I might write the following:Gandhi sees modern civilization as a threat to the Indian people because it promotes an endless cycle of selfish want. He says, "the railways, machineries and the corresponding increase of indulgent habits are the true badges of slavery of the Indian people" (p. 118). In Gandhi’s mind, such things are unnecessary because happiness -- he asserts -- is "largely a mental condition" (p. 123). For Gandhi, accordingly, if acquiring material goods will not make us happier, then the money and energy we devote to do so should be considered a form of slavery.ElementTextTheClaimWhat are you trying to demonstrate?Gandhi sees modern civilization as a threat to the Indian people because it promotes an endless cycle of selfish wantThe EvidenceWhat proof do you have?He says, "the railways, machineries and the corresponding increase of indulgent habits are the true badges of slavery of the Indian people" (p. 118). In Gandhi’s mind, such things are unnecessary because happiness -- he asserts -- is "largely a mental condition" (p. 123). The WarrantWhy do you think that your proof is relevant to your claim?For Gandhi, accordingly, if acquiring material goods will not make us happier, then the money and energy we devote to do so should be considered a form of slavery.Some things to note about the paragraph:1) Note that in the sentences with quoted material, I use an introductory phrase such as "he says," or "he asserts" to introduce the quotation. The quotation is, therefore, part of my own sentence. Again, a quotation must always form part of your own sentence. It cannot stand alone. 2) MOST IMPORTANTLY, note that the last sentence explains and interprets the quoted materialin the context of my claim that I wish to support. This last sentence does NOT merely repeat the claim; instead it interprets the evidence and demonstrates how it is relevant to the claim.Let's look at an example from your reading for this week about the Dominican Republic:Another simultaneous attempt to include and exclude certain elements of Dominican ethnicity is found in a display of what are termed “typical” Dominican dolls. These ceramic dolls, which are an extremely popular item in tourist shops, are usually made with long flowing dresses, hats, and flowers or baskets. The most intriguing aspect of the dolls is that they are faceless. Dominicans are quick to explain that the dolls have no face because Dominicans as such have no face—he or she is a mix of three cultures. Interestingly, the dolls’ skin is a bronze color reminiscent of the Taino and never black. Though called “traditional,” these dolls have only been in production since the 1980s. They are a popular form of exporting a desired identity through tourist consumption. Lining the shelves of tourist and displayed in the Museum of the Dominican Man to remind Dominicans of their official identity, they give a subtle and unintentional glimpse of a people who desire to embrace a reality that does not exist.Notice how this paragraph uses claim/evidence/warrant elements to make its point perusasively:ElementTextThe ClaimWhat are you trying to demonstrate? Another simultaneous attempt to include and exclude certain elements of Dominican ethnicity is found in a display of what are termed “typical” Dominican dolls.The EvidenceWhat proof do you have?The most intriguing aspect of the dolls is that they are faceless. Dominicans are quick to explain that the dolls have no face because Dominicans as such have no face—he or she is a mix of three cultures. Interestingly, the dolls’ skin is a bronze color reminiscent of the Taino and never black.The WarrantWhy do you think that your proof is relevant to your claim?Lining the shelves of tourist and displayed in the Museum of the Dominican Man to remind Dominicans of their official identity, they give a subtle and unintentional glimpse of a people who desire to embrace a reality that does not exist.Exercise A:Read this passage from an article by Sasha Abramsky on America's prison system.Horror stories have led to calls for longer prison sentences, for the abolition of parole, and for the increasingly punitive treatment of prisoners. The politics of opinion-poll populism has encouraged elected and corrections officials to build isolation units, put more prisons on "lockdown" status (in which prisoners are kept in their cells about twenty-three hours a day), abolish grants that allowed prisoners to study toward diplomas and degrees, and generally make life inside as miserable as possible. Marc Mauer, the assistant director of the Sentencing Project, an advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., says, "Fifty years ago rehabilitation was a primary goal of the system." Nowadays it's not. "The situation we're in now is completely unprecedented," Mauer says. "The number going through the system dwarfs that in any other period in U.S. history and virtually in any other country as well." In 1986, according to figures published in the Survey of State Prison Inmates (1991), 175,662 people were serving sentences of more than ten years; five years later 306,006 were serving such sentences. People haven't become more antisocial; their infractions and bad habits are just being punished more ruthlessly. Crime, however, is a complex issue, and responses to it that might instinctively seem sensible, or simply satisfying, may prove deeply counterproductive.2 Questions for Exercise A:1) Abramsky uses both direct and indirect quotations. Identify one example for each from Abramsky's text. If you are uncertain of the distinction between direct and indirect quotations, see here.(Remember as you write papers in college, that even indirect quotations require citations.) 2) Identify Abramsky's claim and his warrant Exercise BReread the following passage from the Epstein reading you have already done, then do the exercise that followsWhat accounts for the high rate of incarceration in the US, particularly of black males? Opinions vary, but for drug crimes in particular, part of the problem has to do with excessive surveillance of young black men by the police and other authorities. White youths may carry and use drugs just as often as blacks, but they seldom get caught, and if they do, they may be more likely to get off with a warning. In one recent study, 60 to 75 percent of black teenagers in Baltimore and Chicago said they were routinely harassed by the police. "Everywhere we go, we going to get stopped," said one Chicago youth. Once he was approached by detectives as he and a friend were leaving the church they regularly attended:They was like, "Do y'all got guns?" or something. "We heard shooting on the next block, y'all match the description. Where y'all just come from?" We like, "We just come out the church, y'all done seen it." You know just, they stopping us for no reason.While police surveillance and harassment may explain the racial discrepancy in drug-related crime, it probably explains little of the same discrepancy in violent crime. When it comes to homicide, which is the most accurately measured crime of all, the data are clear: blacks are seven times more likely to be offenders and six times more likely to be victims than whites. This cannot be explained by discrimination in arrests and sentencing alone.Above, Epstein explains why police harassment can not explain racial discrepancies in violent crime. In this exercise, you will add an additional paragrph to Epstein's article to make an argument that Epstein might have made, but did not.Let's look at a passage by Heather Mac Donald, a journalist, on mandatory sentencing laws; you will be taking information from this passage to write the new paragraph for Epstein's article. Unfair drug policies are an equally popular explanation for black incarceration rates...Playing a starring role in this [argument] are federal crack penalties, the source of the greatest amount of misinformation in the race and incarceration debate. Crack is a smokeable and highly addictive cocaine concentrate, created by cooking powder cocaine until it hardens into pellets called “rocks.” Crack produces a faster—and more potent—high than powder cocaine, and it’s easier to use, since smoking avoids the unpleasantness of needles and is more efficient than snorting. Under the 1986 federal Anti-Drug Abuse Act, getting caught with five grams of crack carries a mandatory minimum five-year sentence in federal court; to trigger the same five-year minimum, powder-cocaine traffickers would have to get caught with 500 grams. On average, federal crack sentences are three to six times longer than powder sentences for equivalent amounts.The media... target the federal crack penalties because crack defendants are likely to be black. In 2006, 81 percent of federal crack defendants were black, while only 27 percent of federal powder-cocaine defendants were. Since federal crack rules are more severe than those for powder, and crack offenders are disproportionately black, those rules must explain why so many blacks are in prison, the conventional wisdom holds.NOTE: The phrase in red is the author's summary of the viewpoint she is criticizing. The phrase "the conventional wisdom holds" tells you that the preceding material is NOT what she thinks to be true but what she claims her opponents claim.But consider the actual number of crack sellers sentenced in federal court each year. In 2006, 5,619 were tried federally, 4,495 of them black. From 1996 to 2000, the federal courts sentenced more powder traffickers (23,743) than crack traffickers (23,121). It’s going to take a lot more than 5,000 or so crack defendants a year to account for the 562,000 black prisoners in state and federal facilities at the end of 2006—or the 858,000 black prisoners in custody overall, if one includes the population of county and city jails. Nor do crack/powder disparities at the state level explain black incarceration rates: only 13 states distinguish between crack and powder sentences, and they employ much smaller sentence differentials.

THE WARRANT (page 2)

A warrant is a general principal that serves as a bridge between your claim and your evidence -- it explains how your evidence is both accurate and relevant to your claim. For example, if one claims:

John Jay College is the best place to study Criminal Justice because US News & World Report ranked it number 1 in that field.

Element
Text

The
Claim

What are you trying to demonstrate?

John Jay College is the best place to study Criminal Justice.

The Evidence

What proof do you have?

US News & World Report ranked it number 1 in Criminal Justice.

the reader might ask:

Even if we assume that your evidence is accurate and the magazine did rank John Jay first in the field, why should that lead me to believe your claim that John Jay is the best place to study criminal justice?

This questions above underscores that even if both your claim and your evidence are entirely accurate, it is possible to make a weak argument.

You must explain why the evidence you are presenting supports the claim you are making.

In short, you need to establish a warrant between your claim and your evidence

In this example, the warrant might be:

Since US News & World Report is a recognized authority in ranking schools, we can trust their opinion about John Jay.

The whole argument, then, would read:

John Jay College is the best place to study Criminal Justice because US News & World Report ranked it number 1 in that field. Since US News & World Report is a recognized authority in ranking schools, we can trust their opinion about John Jay.

Element	Text
The Claim What are you trying to demonstrate?	John Jay College is the best place to study Criminal Justice
The Evidence What proof do you have?	US News & World Report ranked it number 1 in that field
The Warrant Why do you think that your proof is relevant to your claim?	Since US News & World Report is a recognized authority in ranking schools, we can trust their opinion about John Jay.

Let's take a look at another fairly simple example from the world of sports:

Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player who ever lived. He holds the NBA records for highest career regular-season scoring average (30.12 points per game) and highest career playoff scoring average (33.4 points per game). Since regular-season scoring averages and playoff scoring averages are the best indicators we have of a player's greatness and no one beats Jordan in these statistics, he must be the greatest player of all time.

Element	Text
The Claim What are you trying to demonstrate?	Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player who ever lived.
The Evidence What proof do you have?	He holds the NBA records for highest career regular-season scoring average (30.12 points per game) and highest career playoff scoring average (33.4 points per game).
The Warrant Why do you think that your proof is relevant to your claim?	Since regular-season scoring averages and playoff scoring averages are the best indicators we have of a player's greatness and no one beats Jordan in these statistics, he must be the greatest player of all time.