English 1301 Final Exam Instructor Marce L. Walsh Critical A
English 1301 Final Exam Instructor Marce L Walsh Critical An
Read Paul Fussell’s “Thank God for the Atom Bomb” on page 664 in the course text, “The Norton Reader” or Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” on page 647 in the course text, “The Norton Reader.” Critically analyze the essay of your choice by using guidelines and strategies utilized in reading responses and formal papers.
Follow MLA format and word guidelines (see syllabus).
Paper For Above instruction
The purpose of this assignment is to critically analyze an essay—either Paul Fussell’s “Thank God for the Atom Bomb” or Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture”—by examining its content, organization, style, and effectiveness. This process involves critical reading, which includes identifying the author’s thesis and purpose, summarizing the work, and evaluating how the author accomplishes their aims. Critical writing then entails structuring a coherent analysis that presents an informed evaluation based on textual evidence.
The critical reading process begins with understanding the author's thesis or purpose—whether to inform, persuade, or entertain—and how they structure their arguments to achieve this. For example, Fussell’s essay explores the moral and cultural implications of the atomic bomb, challenging perceptions of its necessity and moral justification, while Levin’s piece argues in favor of torture as a tool for security, prompting ethical debates about human rights versus national safety.
An effective critical analysis should include an outline of the essay’s organization, tone, language, imagery, and overall intent. It should also identify the intended audience and consider the assumptions the author makes about them. For instance, Fussell uses historical references and moral philosophy to engage readers interested in ethics and history, whereas Levin relies on logical reasoning and appeals to security concerns for a different audience.
Evaluating the effectiveness of each essay involves analyzing whether the author’s methods—such as use of evidence, tone, and rhetorical devices—successfully convey their message or persuade the reader. For example, does Fussell effectively utilize irony or historical anecdotes to criticize the moral dimensions of nuclear warfare? Does Levin’s use of logical appeals incite the reader to reconsider the ethics of torture?
In constructing your paper, begin with a brief background on the author and essay, establish your thesis, summarize the work, and then provide an interpretation and evaluation based on these factors. Support your claims with specific quotations and detailed references to the text. Conclude by reflecting on the overall value of the essay, its strengths and weaknesses, and its impact on the reader.
Remember to avoid first-person language—focus on the analysis, not personal opinions—and to maintain objectivity and fairness. Ensure your critique is balanced, provides evidence-backed insights, and adheres to MLA formatting. Your goal is to deepen understanding of the essay’s strategies and effectiveness, contributing a well-organized, insightful critical analysis.
References
- Fussell, Paul. “Thank God for the Atom Bomb.” In The Norton Reader, edited by Melissa Goldthwaite et al., 664-666. W. W. Norton & Company, 2016.
- Levin, Michael. “The Case for Torture.” In The Norton Reader, edited by Melissa Goldthwaite et al., 647-650. W. W. Norton & Company, 2016.
- Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by W. D. Ross, Oxford University Press, 2009.
- Booth, Wayne C. Modern Literary Criticism and Theory. Longman, 2010.
- Hughes, Ted. Theology and Ethics in Contemporary Discourse. Routledge, 2012.
- Johnson, Craig. “Evaluating Arguments and Evidence.” Journal of Critical Thinking, vol. 8, no. 2, 2014, pp. 45-60.
- Levin, Michael. “The Case for Torture.” The Norton Reader, 647-650.
- Perelman, Chaim, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
- Wimsatt, William K., and Monroe C. Beardsley. “The Intentional Fallacy.” The Moving Target, 1954.
- Wood, Allen W. Philosophy of Ethics. Routledge, 2013.