After reading both the Carr and Goldsmith articles, consider the questions below. In particular, see how you might utilize some of the terms or ideas from the "Rhetoric: History and Principles" slides, or from last week's video, $"$In Defense of Rhetoric," to better analyze the texts, and thereby answer the questions. Of course, any prior understandings of rhetorical principles may apply here, too. Be sure to directly reference the text to support your claims.

Please reply to at least two other students' posts.

$1.$ Carr utilizes concession, rebuttal, and evidence quite effectively throughout his article. Choose one of these three "moves" to look more closely at$,$ considering his purpose, audience, and form, as you understand them to be$.$ In other words, why does he choose to use concession $($or rebuttal, or evidence$)$ the way he does, and how is this connected to his rhetorical situation.

$2.$ Referencing at least one claim or rebuttal Goldsmith makes, and the evidence he uses as support, explain how Goldsmith is in direct conversation with Carr. Then, utilize any rhetorical terms you have to evaluate, given this conversation, which writer's argument is stronger.