Precise definitions are essential for clarity, fairness, and accuracy in communication. Vagueness and ambiguity can undermine trust, lead to misunderstandings, and ruin constructive dialogue. Therefore, when writing or speaking, it's important to define key terms clearly, especially when they are open to many interpretations. For example, if a teacher tells students to “complete a short essay” without specifying the word count, some students might write 200 words while others write 800, leading to confusion. By defining “short essay” as 300-400 words, the teacher ensures that everyone understands the expectation. Furthermore, emotive language can make arguments more persuasive by appealing to feelings, but it also risks slanting the message. It can distract from facts and manipulate opinions. In my view, it’s important to use emotive language carefully to maintain credibility and fairness. On the other hand, Logical fallacies weaken arguments by using poor reasoning. Fallacies of relevance, like ad hominem and slippery slope, distract from the issue by attacking the person or exaggerating consequences. Fallacies of insufficient evidence, like hasty generalization and appeal to ignorance, draw conclusions without enough proof. These fallacies make arguments less credible and can mislead the audience. Recognizing them helps us think more critically and argue more effectively.
To analyze the following argument, I will use 2 premises and a conclusion:

Premise 1: All students who study hard pass their exams.
Premise 2: Maria studies hard.
Conclusion: Maria will pass her exam.
This shows how the premises lead logically to the conclusion.