To start off with the first claim I found in section six, This seems to be a moral/ethical or evaluative claim to me.
She is not, according to Brannan, “a normal, carefree six-year-old.”
This is mostly an evaluative claim because he’s claiming that after reviewing her own behavior he can confidently state that this girl is not a normal six year old. So now looking more into this I believe this is probably a evaluative claim.
Different studies of the children of American World War II, Korea, and Vietnam vets with PTSD have turned up different results: “45 percent” of kids in one small study “reported significant PTSD signs”; “83 percent reported elevated hostility scores.” Other studies have found a “higher rate of psychiatric treatment”; “more dysfunctional social and emotional behavior”; “difficulties in establishing and maintaining friendships.”
The is obviously a quantitative claim because of the way they are stating the claim with evidence from research.
When more rigorous controls were applied, there was no evidence for the intergenerational transmission of trauma.
I’d say that this is an evaluative because based off of the last paragraph which stated all of the evidence to make this claim, this is just a claim to confirm another question.
Holocaust survivors “had more resources and networks, wider family members and community to support them to adapt to their new circumstances after a war.” They were not, in other words, expected to man up and get over it.
I would put this as a more Casual claim because you can kind of see the cause and effect here. Because of the events that happened to these people and the community surrounding them to help them recover, of course they weren’t just expected to get over it just like that.