Outcome 2 Argumentative Analysis

As my intended major is in the scientific field, it is vital that I am proficient in all aspects of Outcome 2. Outcome 2 deals with a writer’s ability to read, analyze, and synthesize complex texts, and the writer’s ability to purposely incorporate evidence from the texts in a way that effectively supports not only the authors writing, but their overall complex claim. A writer’s claim is only as good as the evidence that supports it, so it is vital for the author to incorporate scholarly and peer reviewed evidence that advance the writers purpose, and help to achieve the overall goal of the literary work. A writer cannot make an effective argument without having reliable sources of evidence to support the literary work as a whole.

To fully demonstrate my advancement in all the writing aspects of Outcome 2, I will be using my annotated bibliography, titled “The Distinction Between Robotics and Human Workers in the Industrial Workplace”. My annotated bibliography was focused on the automotive shift in the mechanical industry. I incorporated four scholarly sources, each having a different opinion and
aspect of the automotive shift in the mechanical industry. For each source, I summarized the overall message of the scientific article, and elaborated on the its credibility, and how this source influenced my opinion on the mechanical industry, and how I could incorporate and apply this source into my research paper. An example of this can be seen in the scholarly source, “Rifkin, Jeremy (August 3rd 2005). Jeremy Rifkin on Europe’s Uncertain Future: The End of Work. Spiegel Online” where I write:

“I can use this source to help substantiate the support for human workers in the service industry, and use it as an argument against the use of robotics in the workplace. This source has given light to not only how technology affects workplace production and workers’ jobs, but how the technological shift negatively affects the economy of countries around the world.”

Here, you can see how I interpreted the claims developed in the source, and elaborated on how I can use this source to develop my own complex claim in my argumentative research essay.
The purpose of the essay is to argue whether the shift to automation in the mechanical industry is more beneficial to companies than traditional human workers, and I utilized this source, and numerous other scholarly sources, to strategically support my complex claim in my augmentative research paper. Where one source may be in support for the automotive shift in the mechanical industry, in my annotated bibliography, I incorporated four different opinionated sources that each provide a different outlook on the situation, therefore allowing me to utilize both sides of the argument to develop a complex claim that effectively develops ideas from both sides of the
argument.

Through this outcome, I was able to greatly improve my awareness of credible sources, and how to accurately analyze them, allowing me to incorporate them into my research essay. Before, as a writer, I would only search for information that would help to prove my claim was write; however, through the writing elements of outcome two, I discovered how to comprehend the rhetorical situation of the author, and analyze the purpose of their essay; therefore, allowing me to gather information from all sides of an argument to completely and efficiently create a complex and argumentative claim. As a Mechanical Engineer, I will be able to use these skills that I developed from outcome 2 to help me correctly solve problems by accurately searching for credible sources from all sides of the argument, therefore allowing me to make the best and most evaluated decision to solve the problem at hand.