What challenges can you raise against one of the arguments premises, or its conclusion, and what implications does this challenge have for the argument as a whole?

To schematize is to reproduce an argument in its logical form: identifying its ultimate conclusion and supporting premises. You should use as few premises as possible and organize them in the most logical order possible, making connections between them explicit.

To exposit is to explain, in your own words, the authors argument. You can elaborate here on the schemas premises as well as identify any missing premises, explaining their necessity to the conclusion. You can also contextualize the argument here, with respect to the authors larger aims in the text.

To evaluate is to critically engage with the argument. Is it valid (if the premises are true, does the conclusion follow)? Is it sound (are the premises and conclusion all true)? What challenges can you raise against one of the arguments premises, or its conclusion, and what implications does this challenge have for the argument as a whole?