A Method for Reading, Writing, and Thinking Critically

              The general argument made by Kathleen McCormick in her work A Method for Reading, Writing, and Thinking Critically is that we, as a country, do not know how to analyze a conflict much farther than right and wrong or winner versus loser. More specifically, McCormick suggests that there are two ways to analyze a piece of work to develop an evaluation in our own perspectives. She writes, “Historical analysis asks you to relate the values, practices, or beliefs of a text you are reading to those of a different time period from that in which the text was produced. Cultural analysis asks you to relate the values, practices, or beliefs of a text you are reading to other, often different or seemingly unrelated ideas, beliefs, or practices from the same time period in which the text was produced.” (pg.21) In this passage, McCormick is suggesting that historical analysis and cultural analysis are the two ways to make an evaluation of an argument based on your own perspective. In conclusion, it is McCormick’s belief that we should analyze text with historical and cultural analysis.

            In my view, McCormick is right because I agree that we as a country we only think that there are two sides to an issue. For example, you can either like scrambled eggs or over easy eggs without considering any other option. However, I think that McCormick is wrong saying that there are only two criteria to base an evaluation off of. Although McCormick might object that those are the two broadest areas of analysis, I maintain that there are a lot more things to consider when evaluating a text to form an opinion. Therefore, I conclude that we as a country need to examine all aspects of the problem but there are more ways to analyze a problem.