When you're arguing you want to make your point as objective as possible, for this you have to be impartial so that your proof is strong.
Comparing the opposite side's views to something unpleasant is useless since this kind of comparison holds no proof that your argument is true. <em>Incorrect</em>
If you include only general details the audience will understand, you might not be able to communicate the specific points of your argument, therefore you wouldn't be able to prove it is accurate. <em>Incorrect</em>
To make your argument effective you have to use specific details to refute the opposite side's views. That way you'll present the specific points in which your argument will stand, you will communicate logical and objective ideas about your argument and they will work to prove it. <u><em>Correct</em></u>
If you appeal to emotion, your argument will be subject to possible biases since the way a person or group feels towards something doesn't prove it right or wrong. <em>Incorrect</em>
Answer: Civic engagement is seen by many as an activity that serves not only as a key component
to the maintenance of a democracy, but also as a force that sustains social ties across
communities small and large (Colby et al., 2000; Putnam, 1993; 2000). As defined by Thomas
Ehrlich, civic engagement can be understood as “…working to make a difference in the civic life
of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation
to make that difference…[and] promoting the quality of life in a community, through both
