Posted on

Innocent Children

Poverty violates children’s rights. There are eight children’s fundamental rights: the right to life, right to education, right to food, right to health, right to water, right to identity, right to freedom and right to protection. While some children are fortunate to have all of their rights, some children are not. Innocent children are the primary victims of poverty. According to Humanium’s webpage, every day more than 30,000 children die of poverty related causes. Poverty deprives them of access to medical care, clean water, food, shelter, security, protection and good education. Being deprived of these basic rights blocks children’s ability to develop and to create a better future for themselves.

kozol jonathanChildren live in poverty because their family is facing poverty. Moreover, they do not get proper parental care or nutrition. In Amazing Grace Jonathan Kozol described their living conditions as very bad: In humid summer weather, roaches crawl on virtually every surface of the houses in which many of the children live. Rats emerge from holes in bedroom walls, terrorizing infants in their cribs. In the streets outside, the restlessness and anger that are present in all seasons frequently intensify under the stress of heat.., Depression is common among children in Mott Haven. Many cry a great deal but cannot explain exactly why. Fear and anxiety are common. Many cannot sleep. Asthma is the most common illness among children here. Many have to struggle to take in a good deep breath. Some mothers keep oxygen tanks, which children describe as “breathing machines,” next to their children’s beds. (4, 5) This was the life of the children who lived in the poorest neighborhood in New York City. Moreover, more than 50% of such children working in drug trafficking, slavery, prostitution, as well as in child labor are unacceptable and violations of children’s rights on a global scale. Children should be allowed to enjoy their childhood and should not be allowed to work like adults. This kind of living condition will never help children to be able to become a good person.

A child should not be denied the right for education just because of poverty. They have an ability to be developed but they do not have the environment they need. In the article of Jonathan Kozol,  Still Separate, Still Unequal , poor children send her a letter “Dear Mr. Kozol, we do not have things you have. You have clean things. We do not have. You have clean bathroom. We do not have. You have parks and we do not have Parks…,” and other some of the complaints, “We do not have Music or Arts and no fun place to play.” Another child wrote from an overcrowded school “We have a gym but it is for line up. I think it is not fair” (243). If they have an opportunity to have the right environment they are just like the other kids. They can achieve what they dream of.innocent children

Every single person has the right to life from the moment of birth. For children, the right to life is the chance to be able to live and have the possibility to grow and become an adult. However, because of poverty, a child is dying every three seconds. For example in Amazing Grace by Jonathan Kozol, in the poor neighborhood of New York, kids are being killed “On Valentine’s day of 1993, three more children and three adults were shot dead on the living room floor . . . a week later, a mother was murdered and her baby wounded by a bullet in the stomach while they were standing on a South Bronx corner” (69). In another example, “a nine year old girl who died of AIDS” (109). Children are dying and they are innocent. They could be the creators and shapers of nations tomorrow.

Children come to life to love and to be loved. They are the wealth of their nations. The children have to be trained to use their talents, and need to be given appropriate direction. They have abilities in various ways and help in nation-building and strengthening of it. Their quality and personality will determine the kind of destiny that beckons the nation. If a society is careless and carefree about its youth and fails to educate them in a productive manner, then the society is in danger of facing a destructive and violent youth. By protecting their rights, the children of today will be adults of tomorrow.

Works Cited

Johathan, Kozol, “Amazing Grace” New York, New York, 1995.

Gary, Colombo. Robert, Cullen. Bonnie Lisle. “Rereading America.” Cultural Context for

            Critical Thinking and Writing.2007, seventh edition, page 243,


Posted on

How to write a Critical Thinking or Dialectic in Philosophy

Critical Thinking, also known as Dialectic, is the method of philosophy. It is a method applicable only to open DIaelect Essayquestions, that is, questions that are not answerable by means of observation or calculation. In this regard it is applicable both to private open questions – which, because of their private, particular nature, cannot be considered philosophical – as well as public, or general question – that is, ones which require no special knowledge or information about particulars in order to be answered.

The method of Critical Thinking consists of a method of framing issues and testing conclusions which is similar to the deductive manner in which science frames theories and then tests hypotheses deduced from them. The main difference is that science deals only with questions that can be answered by observation and calculation, i.e. closed questions, while Dialectic only. deals only with open questions.

In a wider sense, critical thinking can be described as deductively framed argumentation. In this sense, the method of science is embraced within Critical Thinking.

The Dialectic Method/Essay Format

Philosophy proceeds by the presentation and development of arguments regarding controversial general open questions.

dialectical-methodTo “take a position for the sake of argument” means to present an argument for or against a controversial thesis, regardless of whether or not you’ve decided that you subscribe to that argument.

To present an argument means

  1. to state a thesis – negative or affirmative; and
  2. to state a rationale for that thesis.

A rationale is a set of premises which, together, entails the thesis, i.e. the conclusion of the argument. This means that the premises must be such that, if they are all true, then the conclusion has to be true as well.

There are two kinds of premise that are included in any rationale:

  1. formal, or “major” premise, and
  2. material, or “minor” premise.

A material premise is the evidence for the conclusion. It is the most likely kind of premise to be stated; the least likely to be a “hidden” premise.

A formal premise is a “connecting” premise: it connects the evidence deductively to the conclusion; i.e. it expresses the intended deductive relationship between the evidence and the conclusion.

A formal premise is the most likely kind of premise not to be stated, i.e. to remain “unstated” or “hidden”.

Every well-presented argument has at least one material premise and at least one formal premise.

The way to construct an argument is backwards:

  • First, think of the conclusion you want to argue for – for the sake of argument.
  • Next, think of the strongest evidence that there is to support that conclusion.
  • Thirdly, express the deductive connection between the conclusion and the evidence.

To develop an argument is to defend it, then criticize it, then try to rebut the criticism against it, then assess whether the rebuttal effectively handles the criticism.

To defend an argument is to do two things:

  1. provide explanatory (not dictionary) definitions for pivotal terms in the premises.
  2. advocate for the truth of each of the premises.


  1. Each definition should be in a paragraph by itself, and each premise should be advocated for in a separate paragraph. You should try to defend more than one premise at a time.
  2. The conclusion is not to be defended, since it is already taken care of by the premises.

To criticize an argument is more succinct: it is simply to turn the tables and try to say why one of the premises of the argument – the one most vulnerable to criticism – may actually be false, or at least dubitable. This should take a good-sized paragraph. Be careful in your criticism to remain patient and not try to turn back to rebuttal of the criticism too quickly.

To rebut criticism is to turn the tables on the criticism and try to say how the criticism fails to refute the argument. This also should be a good-sized paragraph. It should be based on new insight and not merely be a restatement of the defense.

To assess an argument in this context is to judge whether the rebuttal overcomes the criticism or not. This can be done in a paragraph, either before or in concluding. If done in concluding, the concluding paragraph should be a good-sized paragraph.

This, in short, is the method of dialectic reasoning, and that is what justifies it as the format for philosophical essays. In real life the method is reiterative, where there may be several rounds of criticism and rebuttal, then revised presentation of the argument, etc.

Read Also: What is Referencing?