Around one page and a half. please address the following:
1. Paragraph one: Identify the central thesis/claim of the reading you chose. This should be a one (or at most two) sentence statement that focuses and summarizes the central claim being made. (What is the writer trying to convince you of regarding the topic?) (1.5 pts)
2. Paragraph two: Identify one or two secondary arguments and/or items of evidence the author provides to support the thesis/claim? (1 pt.)
3. Paragraph three: Identify 1-2 assumptions, either explicit or implicit, that must be true for the claim and the argument to work (i.e. what must be accepted as true about the nature of the situation, the context, human being or the world for this claim to be valid or true?) (1 pt.)
4. Paragraph four: Discuss the rhetorical effectiveness of the argument. Items to consider: Can you tell who the target audience is? Is there a match between the language, audience and purpose? Is there logical or philosophical consistency between claim/thesis, supporting arguments and assumptions? Does it “hang together”? Do you find it convincing? You may address any of these points that are relevant, but you must have some evaluation of rhetorical effect. Be specific! Use examples from the text. (1 pt.) –
The Central Thesis/Claim
Tarlier (2004) suggests the need to define and mediate the relationship between evidence and knowledge in nursing through the epistemological diversity that supports the nursing practice. The author further states that nursing researchers should evaluate the meaning and truth-value of new evidence using current knowledge in nursing.
Tarlier (2004) suggests that epistemological diversity (or the different ways of knowledge) can play an essential role in evaluating new evidence and support the value of knowledge before being used in research. He also argues that nursing evidence that is not interpreted using epistemological diversity is vulnerable to multiple interpretations or agendas. To solve the problem, researchers should expose their evidence to epistemological diversity before presenting it for use in practice.
One of the hypotheses presented in the paper is that evidence present to practice on a singular basis could undergo different interpretations, which could affect its applicability in nursing practice. The second assumption is that when researchers expose their evidence to the epistemological diversity, they generate a meaning that can be applied in practice without any room for emerging interpretations.
The Rhetorical Effectiveness of the Argument
Tarlier (2004) speaks to nursing researchers and practitioners who are the implementers of evidence-based practice. The author uses suitable language for the audience and to meet the purpose of the study. For example, the use of terms, such as epistemological diversity and nursing praxis, could be complicated for another audience outside the nursing field. The author presents a logical and philosophical consistency between the thesis, supporting arguments, and assumptions. The three items follow logically to create an organized argument and supporting evidence. The author convinces the audience about the need to subject new evidence to epistemological diversity to establish all possible meanings and implications in practice.
Tarlier, D. (2005). Mediating the meaning of evidence through epistemological diversity. Nursing Inquiry, 12(2), 126-134.