Today I read Nub’s response and concluded that the key ideas are the author’s focus on the different kinds of arguments and understanding when to apply these types of arguments. Nub chose to reflect on the arguments of facts and, according to Nub, it is the type of “[argument] made in accordance with facts”.

In my response, I chose to respond to arguments of evaluation. They are similar in ways where they both require understanding and preparation of the topic. The difference is that arguments of evaluation require analyzing and more thought processing. In comparison, arguments of facts are the confirmation of the research and evidence that is being found. After reading this response, I feel that arguments of facts are one of the first steps in preparing for the arguments of evaluation. Nub’s response followed the guidelines of the criteria.