Part I

“It is known that fraternities have a stereotypically bad reputation.” Pg. 1

This is a bandwagon appeal from the list of common logical fallacies. This is because I am assuming that everybody knows that fraternities have a bad reputation. It shows that I think that everybody knows about this stereotype. I can correct this by rephrasing my statement to show that the stereotype is not a shared belief amongst everybody, and clarify that it is only a portion of people who believe this.

“O’Donnell declares that binge drinking is present within fraternities and probably will remain present, although some switch liquor for beer instead, lessening the proof, and therefore the chance of death or blackouts.”

This statement by O’Donnell is a hasty generalization. The conclusion is based off of insufficient data, and no specific statistics. The author thinks that because a particular fraternity does an action, a result that is in favor of his point of view is the result. In my paper, what I can do is point this out, thus adding more of my personal anecdote to the argument.

Part II

On my poster, I plan on incorporating numerous statistics and tables. Words will be minimally used, and instead substituted with graphs and other figures. I will use the two side panels to focus on 4 different arguments included in my paper (2 for each panel), and the middle panel focusing on the aspects of alcohol vs. development, which I think is the biggest, and best argument in my paper. This will highlight my research topic. I went to the poster meeting, so this helped formulate my tactics through poster content, as well as overall design to appeal to my audience.