In Class: Logical Appeal Free Write

The part of this chapter that I found to be most confusing was at the end when they discussed degree, analogies, and precedent. I understand that they can be an argument of reason, as all of these things call for personal reasoning to make conclusions, but then again all of these things have so much room for discussion that I don't think they can necessarily be arguments of fact. It just seems like there could be too much room to argue around the analogy or precedent. These things do not seem very "factual" to me and just more of an observation or inference.