s Critical Thinking

I will be showing Walton’s fallacies in the texts I use on â€Å"Communication Between Divorced Parents†. I will demonstrate by using Walton’s fallacies how some parents remain friendly and put the children first in divorce situations. I will also demonstrate Walton’s fallacies on how other parents don’t have anything good to say about each other and tend to put the children in the middle. I will then be able to understand the dynamics of divorced parents better and how miscommunication affects their future communications. Some problems can be overcome with planning and forethought, as we have seen, but this eventuality is difficult to guard against, the best advice being the fullest possible airing of views on every aspect of the topic before marriage (Shreeve, 89). I believe that this fits well with Walton’s argument as a reasoned dialogue. In discussing these issues the couple will go through all types of dialogue: quarrel, debate, persuasion to get the other person to see their point, negotiation to come to an agreement, information seeking – asking further questions, action seeking, and even educational. After applying Walton’s dialogue they will have aired their views on every aspect of the topic of marriage. So thrash out the whole approach you should adopt with your partner beforehand. And however, desperately unhappy and bitter you may feel yourself, make an enormous effort not to let this spill out into your relationship with your child or children – especially if their existence contributed to the stresses that finally broke your marriage (Shreeve, 91). I believe that the author is using Walton’s argument as reasoned dialogue here for the parents to put a plan together on how they are going to handle the children and how they are going to behave towards it each. The author is telling them to go through Walton’s process. I see Walton’s process being used to its fullest here. There will be ... 's Critical Thinking Free Essays on Walton\'s Critical Thinking I will be showing Walton’s fallacies in the texts I use on â€Å"Communication Between Divorced Parents†. I will demonstrate by using Walton’s fallacies how some parents remain friendly and put the children first in divorce situations. I will also demonstrate Walton’s fallacies on how other parents don’t have anything good to say about each other and tend to put the children in the middle. I will then be able to understand the dynamics of divorced parents better and how miscommunication affects their future communications. Some problems can be overcome with planning and forethought, as we have seen, but this eventuality is difficult to guard against, the best advice being the fullest possible airing of views on every aspect of the topic before marriage (Shreeve, 89). I believe that this fits well with Walton’s argument as a reasoned dialogue. In discussing these issues the couple will go through all types of dialogue: quarrel, debate, persuasion to get the other person to see their point, negotiation to come to an agreement, information seeking – asking further questions, action seeking, and even educational. After applying Walton’s dialogue they will have aired their views on every aspect of the topic of marriage. So thrash out the whole approach you should adopt with your partner beforehand. And however, desperately unhappy and bitter you may feel yourself, make an enormous effort not to let this spill out into your relationship with your child or children – especially if their existence contributed to the stresses that finally broke your marriage (Shreeve, 91). I believe that the author is using Walton’s argument as reasoned dialogue here for the parents to put a plan together on how they are going to handle the children and how they are going to behave towards it each. The author is telling them to go through Walton’s process. I see Walton’s process being used to its fullest here. There will be ...