Urgent Evoke Wiki
(Undo revision 4200 by Mmatessa (talk))
 
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
[[File:Placeholder|right|300px]]
 
 
 
==Argument Map Directory==
 
==Argument Map Directory==
   
 
Argument maps are a way to organize issues (questions to be answered), ideas (alternative answers for a question), and arguments (statements that support or detract an idea or other argument).
 
Argument maps are a way to organize issues (questions to be answered), ideas (alternative answers for a question), and arguments (statements that support or detract an idea or other argument).
 
======
 
   
 
===Question: What energy source should we focus on?===
 
===Question: What energy source should we focus on?===
Line 32: Line 29:
   
 
PRO: [TWR is a large scale, long term solution][http://www.urgentevoke.com/profiles/blogs/learn3-bill-gates]
 
PRO: [TWR is a large scale, long term solution][http://www.urgentevoke.com/profiles/blogs/learn3-bill-gates]
 
======
 
   
 
===Question: What is the right measure to use when talking about the wealth of a country?===
 
===Question: What is the right measure to use when talking about the wealth of a country?===

Latest revision as of 03:55, 10 April 2010

Argument Map Directory[]

Argument maps are a way to organize issues (questions to be answered), ideas (alternative answers for a question), and arguments (statements that support or detract an idea or other argument).

Question: What energy source should we focus on?[]

Proposition: Solar[]

PRO: [America has enough money to develop solar, even if it is not cost effective now][1]

CON: [Solar is not nearly as cost effective as coal/oil or wind][2]

Proposition: Wind[]

PRO: [Wind has a high enough efficiency][3]

PRO: [Wind has a low enough production cost][4]

CON: [Wind is highly unreliable and takes up quite a bit of space][5]

Proposition: Bill Gates' Nuclear (Traveling wave reactor -- TWR)[]

PRO: [TWR runs off the waste created by our current reactors][6]

PRO: [TWR leaves very little waste behind][7]

PRO: [TWR reactor life is about 60 years][8]

PRO: [TWR is a large scale, long term solution][9]

Question: What is the right measure to use when talking about the wealth of a country?[]

Proposition: Gross National Product (GNP)[]

PRO: [Money eases the exchange of product and services][10]

CON: [GNP does not measure life satisfaction][11]

Proposition: Gross National Happiness (GNH)[]

PRO: [GNH has multidimensional poverty measures from ophi.org.uk][12]

CON: [GNH just measures the present environmental damage][13]

Proposition: Gross National Health (GNH)[]

PRO: [Health is both mental and physical, which is even better than just happiness][14]

PRO: [Details looking at health/wellbeing could be included in both GNH and GPI][15]

Proposition: Genuine Progress Index (GPI)[]

PRO: [GPI takes into account more environmental variables than GNH][16]

PRO: [GPI goes further than GNH to try to incorporate long term environmental damage][17]

CON: [GPI does not have an effective development/poverty metric][18]