# data[].attributes.body
I liked this exercise. I went back and reviewed the arguments for and against my topic and was glad to see that people argued against my topic. I initially found it hard for someone to think otherwise of what I was arguing (that the opioid crisis is spiraling out of control) really because my topic hits so close to home and I am very passionate about it. But, after careful consideration and an open mind, I honestly agree with the otherside, which I found helpful when considering further research. Opioids can be useful when being used such as for relieving pain, but WITH moderation - which is the problem, there is a lack of moderation and that is what I am arguing AND how we can provide awareness to this. I still think that my thesis is good, but can definitely use revision in that it is VERY one-sided and I can maybe “take it down a notch” to consider the other side or other counterarguments held against it.

# data[].attributes.body
My first initial thesis for post 8, wasn’t necessarily a set thesis. I sort of talked around my thesis. Because I didn’t have one yet. I didn’t have one because my topic expands over 3 main topics, that are big within themselves, so narrowing down a sentence or two that covers all those topics was kind of hard. I still think my thesis now is too board.

I know there can be a direct opposite of my thesis with how organizations and states have been trying to take action to help animals and to tighten animal breeding and cruelty laws. PETA, SD Humane Society, and I think Gov. Newsom as well.

Why?- New developments such as news like this: https://abc7.com/dog-water-bottle-adopt-a-cat/11590921/ or news like this: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/communities/san-diego/story/2019-11-15/humane-society-increases-fees-as-part-of-contract-extension-with-san-diego . Generally, companion animals are regarded as property and have no legal rights, so increasing adoption fees and new bill of rights for them is a huge improvement.

I’m sure I would have a few hostile audience groups against my paper but a majority of people would agree with it because this topic has been a disturbing reality for some time now and it hasn’t gotten better when it was promised or showing it would.

# data[].attributes.headline
This exercise was very helpful! It showed me where I could improve on my arguments and where I should provide more evidence. Thinking about the other sides argument helped me fill the holes and unanswered question in my own argument. 

# data[].attributes.subject
This exercise was very helpful! It showed me where I could improve on my arguments and where I should provide more evidence. Thinking about the other sides argument helped me fill the holes and unanswered question in my own argument. 

# data[].attributes.body
I suppose it went okay, though I do realize my topic and thesis is incredibly conservational. Making it more difficult for me. Though my thesis needs to be revised and definitely more evidence for my side is in order. From an antithesis point, I couldn't take myself serious because the opposing side just seems so different. Though the argument for my thesis and the other side, could have there own info and understanding there views is also important to make sure from all fronts, I am able to help my side fully.

# data[].attributes.headline
Thesis hasn’t changed, as the most information available on the issue being addressed is in overwhelming favor of the position being argued. The direct opposite of the thesis isn’t quite clear-cut as this is not an advocacy for a ban on opioid prescriptions, but rather a reassessment of their use and encouraging exercised caution by physicians when prescribing them (especially stronger opioids, including oxycodone, hydrocodone, etc.). The counterargument considered includes possible kidney damage from chronic NSAID use, but NSAIDs aren’t often prescribed long-term. Additionally, long-term pain typically requires treatment beyond NSAIDs, thus, NSAIDs play little to no role in long-term pain management. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Thesis hasn’t changed, as the most information available on the issue being addressed is in overwhelming favor of the position being argued. The direct opposite of the thesis isn’t quite clear-cut as this is not an advocacy for a ban on opioid prescriptions, but rather a reassessment of their use and encouraging exercised caution by physicians when prescribing them (especially stronger opioids, including oxycodone, hydrocodone, etc.). The counterargument considered includes possible kidney damage from chronic NSAID use, but NSAIDs aren’t often prescribed long-term. Additionally, long-term pain typically requires treatment beyond NSAIDs, thus, NSAIDs play little to no role in long-term pain management. 

# data[].attributes.body
When I chose to talk about climate change, I find it a big issues that we have to pay attention about it. I think all of us agree with me that is we live in danger if we do not find the right solutions to get rid of the problem of global warming, carbon emissions and ocean pollution.

Antithesis, when some people see that this hypothesis is incorrect and does not exist, and that climate change is a natural phenomenon, we should not worry about it.
Before I judge these, it is better to present the evidence that prove the correctness of my hypothesis.

# data[].attributes.headline
I learned that my antithesis is an integral part of supporting my argument. My hope is to reach the people who agree with my "antithesis," and change their minds. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I learned that my antithesis is an integral part of supporting my argument. My hope is to reach the people who agree with my "antithesis," and change their minds. 

# data[].attributes.body
I have a pretty complex thesis and so I took the conversion to antithesis one cluster of words at a time. At first it seemed silly--like I wouldn't have anything resembling an arguable point--but I did wind up with an antithesis that I actually have heard argued before, and it helped to breakdown and analyze thesis and antithesis in such granular detail. I still think my thesis holds up, to a significant degree, but it's useful to think about the actual points of disagreement that are going to crop up ("philanthropy vs. self interest as motivators" being a big one)

# data[].attributes.body
What I learned after writing my free write is that there are so many reasons as to why someone could and would argue against my thesis. I also have to make sure that I take the right approach and be realistic yet motivating in order to reach my goal. I also found out that there are lots of arguments against my claims and that I will have to do more research on how to counter them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Humility that I could be wrongly approaching my thesis

# data[].attributes.subject
Humility that I could be wrongly approaching my thesis

# data[].attributes.body
From the exercise, I realized how someone else might view my thesis. I focus heavily on Russophobia in reaction to the Ukraine crisis as being a sleeping giant bred into the American ethos. However Russian villainization in media could just be a by-product of historical coincidence. As well as consider the larger argument of the need for solidarity in condemning Putin from Russian nationals since the Ukrainian crisis is undoubtedly an atrocity.

# data[].attributes.headline
it went well after looking back I fixed and really focused on a side and finding a argument for my paper. also was able tp mention both sides and agree with there statements but give a counterargument to it.

# data[].attributes.subject
it went well after looking back I fixed and really focused on a side and finding a argument for my paper. also was able tp mention both sides and agree with there statements but give a counterargument to it.