Sentences with phrase «built points of my argument»

When that doesn't work (because I can explain their errors in their thinking) they begin to corrupt some previously built points of my argument.

Not exact matches

While Jeremy it seems that you're want to proceed through points and counterpoints of an argument as you build up and work to an end, I personally find curious the implicit values of the dialogue.

The assertion about the huge financial involvement in my views is in order but may not be completely correct, as the argument was not only sophistry but antithetical to building a nation devoid of corruption and goes against the global warning on corruption as succulently pointed out.

De Blasio's argument focused on the need to build additional facilities — a point also raised by the president of the correction officers» union last week, who called Mark - Viverito's plan a «fantasy.»

Fights and arguments among secondary characters were clearly included to both resolve character arcs and build the severity of the climax, but all they end up doing is ruining the pace and prolonging what has become a foregone conclusion by this point.

In the case study, your points of the argument need to be always constructed logically as they build in a cohesive manner and related to each other throughout the argument.

Even if I agree completely with each point that you make - excluding your conclusion that Keystone XL shouldn't be built that is the crux of the argument and hand -(and, in fact, I agree with some of your points completely and all at least in part), it doesn't lead to the conclusion «Keystone should not be built.»

You could get around that, of course, by pointing out that it will be Americans paying the tariffs because you'll be making energy far too expensive to build anything here, making the protectionism argument moot.

There are valid arguments on both sides, as purpose - built electric bikes are said to be better able to handle the additional torque and stresses that electric drive systems put on the frames and components, while the kits that enable conversion of a conventional bicycle into an electric bike allows cyclists to use the bikes they already own and ride as the starting point.

One argument for planting trees up north in Sweden has been that it might increase wood as building material instead of concrete... and that would lower co2 emissions... any one tried to make that point in this debate?

The other major argument is «it isn't being done (therefore it will never be done)» and that's just because there's no point in building a power plant if there is already plenty of power.

It's easy to get caught up in building your argument, and fear of vulnerability sets in at times when you get to the point where you share your feelings.