When I read the article “The Case for the End of the Modern Zoo”, many things stood out to me. To begin with, I originally thought that the author was going to argue about why zoos are good since he stated that he liked zoos in the beginning. As I got reading the article, I realized that he wasn’t necessarily taking a stance, as much as he was stating both sides of the argument. It seemed as though he was actually making us aware of the issues rather than give an opinion of them. Even though the author himself may not trying to argue for or against zoos, the reader will can establish a side based on the evidence that the author gives. Depending on whether the reader supports the evidence given can determine whether or not they are against zoos. Since the author gives so much information about both sides, it makes this a stronger argument since there is so much to consider. The way the author jumps around from talking about one side to talking about the other also strengthens the argument because you may think you’re for zoos one minute, but as you keep reading you may start to feel as though you are against them. This cycle could keep repeating as you’re reading through the article.
For my inquiry project, the platform I am using is wordpress. I am using this because it is easy to use, and I am familiar with it. It allows me to easily type out my ideas and share them with everyone else. I also like it because I can edit my post after it is published in case I left something out or wanted to add something. Having people give feedback on your thoughts and ideas is also a plus. It helps me improve my work and think about ideas that I have not thought of before.