(For my presentation I
will be using the two haunting experiences provided in the ghost blog post to
build my argument.)
“In the early 1970s,
teenagers Terry Wido and Jim Waterstrat enjoyed visiting ‘so-called spooky
places’ and made several trips to the house with a group of friends. One of the
guys had heard that the two girls had been murdered in the house, so to bolster
their courage; they took a case of beer. ‘The lights still worked,’ he
remembers, ‘and we all posed with our beers’.
“It was great fun until
one night they were approached by dark figures, which began running towards
them, prompting them to escape to their car. ‘We never did go back there,’ he
says, ‘and years later, I found out that the Grimes sisters were dumped on the
road near that house.’
Argument types:
-
Symbolic Liaison, because the house that they
entered was on a road near the house that the murdered girls were dumped in,
they presumed that had to be the house they were murdered in, making those “dark
figures,” spirits of the murder case that happened in 1957.
-
Specifically Quantitative interlink.
Premises:
-
This could be facts/truth based on probable data,
because the town is known to be haunted by the spirit of this cold cases and the
dumping of the bodies was supposedly close to the house they went into. Based on
the speaker telling us
-
Could also be presumption, “the normal,” based
on a reference group or experience because it was many of them and they were
also drinking.
Modifiers
-
Aggregation, because them believing they were in
the Murder house, plus the fact that the dumping of the bodies was close to the
house plus experiencing the dark figures means it had to be a ghost encounter
of Murder cases that went on in the neighborhood.
“In 1982, Jim and Debbie
Serpico, a suburban couple, and a group of their friends parked their cars in a
nearby church lot and took a Halloween walking tour of the grounds before the
house burned, just for fun. Stepping over the barricade, they headed up the
driveway toward the house, with only the moon lighting their way. Just as they
were debating whether to go inside, they heard a car approach – a dark car with
no headlights – that sped past them and disappeared behind the house. Not sure
if someone had reported them to police, as locals often did when people visited
the grounds, the group opted for a hasty exit. They reached the road only to
find the barricade still in place and a policeman parked nearby, who assured
them he had seen no car.
Argument types:
-
The argument type in this
testimony is example, specifical single, one event is an example. Their claim
that they saw a car pass them up but the cop didn’t is the event that led them
to the conclusion that they saw a ghost car.
Premises:
-
I believe the premises here is both supposed and
presumptions based on a reference group or experience.
Modifiers:
No comments:
Post a Comment