Commentary #1--Lindsey O.

Your argument is against Nicholas Carr’s assertion that the Internet is ruining our brains and that there is almost no way to turn our brains back to normal.  You start off your argument with the opposing view, which is different than the classical argument structure.  I personally think it is a clever way to strengthen your argument since all your support is at the end of the essay, making it more memorable to the reader.  Your essay starts off with the opposing argument, which is stated very fairly.  You use a lot of evidence from Carr’s argument to support the opposing argument, which makes sense since the prompt does ask for us to consider the seriousness of the topic based on “the evidence presented in support of his argument”. 

Then you move on to beginning your (counter)argument with your personal experience with reading.  I find this a very nice transition between the two arguments since it gets the reader to related more with the topic.  The reason why I put “counter” in parentheses is because the counterargument is technically the argument since you put all of your evidence at this section.  What made your argument more solid is the study you cited on page 3 of your essay.  This evidence that there is actually a way to rewire our brains brings up something new to the table, something I wouldn’t think of off the top of my head.  It felt like this evidence is the one that made your argument much stronger in my opinion.  If you wish to, you may want to elaborate more on this supporting evidence to strengthen your argument even more.  Then there is the evidence you provide before the conclusion.  You may have been in a hurry to include another source, but it’s okay!  I actually feel like that evidence is pretty solid if you elaborate more on the quotes you provided.  You could talk more about how our brains are adapting to the changing world.  Possibly in the article, it may talk about how our brains are changing, and these changes may actually not be making us “stupid” but making us more efficient.

All in all, I do think your argument could convince a neutral audience.  Why do I think this?  Well, I myself am on the fence for this subject, though it may seem I am strongly on one side of the fence in my essay.  However, there is a small possibility that your argument may seem so strong because of the way you organized your essay.  You may want to check with the professor if it is okay to change the structure of your argument to not follow the classical argument structure.  Good luck! ^^