英文天堂

Sensing your argument's overall scope and direction, you can consider stating your main point.

In this way an argumentative proposition is like a thesis statement. Besides stating your main point, both help you direct, develop, and monitor your thinking while writing. Like a thesis statement, an argumentative proposition should be scrutinized and, when necessary, modified throughout your writing process. At first, both a thesis and a proposition are often hunches or good guesses about what you will finally claim.

Even at this point, however, your proposition should define your argument's scope and make a debatable assertion. A statement like "Some people ruin things for everyone," is weak because it doesn't make clear what the writer has in mind. It's a vague generalization that provides no direction for writer or reader. If pressed to be precise, the writer might say, "A small group of thoughtless fans is jeopardizing the school's whole soccer program." Now we know what we're talking about.

Like a thesis, your proposition shouldn't be self-evidently true (apple is a vegetable) or claim something that's purely a matter of opinion (apple tastes great). It should have some uncertainty, yet make a claim that your readers will assent to in the end: "Our county agricultural agent should encourage valley farmers to plant more apple."

Anticipating Opposition

One essential characteristic of argument is your sense of an adversary. You aren't simply explaining a concept to someone who will hear you out and accept or reject your idea on its merit. Argument assumes active opposition to your proposition. To win acceptance, then, you must not only explain and support your proposition, but also anticipate and overcome objections that the opposition might raise.

To firm up your impressions and get an overview of the opposition's case relative to your own, make a chart like the one below.

Plotting your argument like this provides a balanced view of the issues. It allows you to see whether you have a chance of making your case and helps you to anticipate crucial points that may determine your success or failure.

Don't try to look good by mentioning only weaker opposition arguments. When you work on the con side of the chart, see the issue through your opponents' eyes, and draw out the most telling arguments they could use against you. Then, when you've finished your Pro and Con Chart, look back to see if your proposition needs revision. You might also begin considering how to refute the opposition's arguments.

Expanding Your Argument

For now, don't worry about your essay's final structure, but consider expanding and developing the points listed on your Pro and Con Chart. Think in terms of paragraphs, and consider developing each point as though you planned to build a paragraph around it. Some points may require extensive development and support, perhaps in a series of closely related paragraphs. Other points may be easy to grasp and so self-evidently true that they could be grouped together in a single paragraph.

You may already sense that developing paragraphs in support of your proposition will be different from developing paragraphs in opposition to it. That's because when you develop arguments for your proposition, you are confirming; when you develop arguments against your proposition, you are refuting. Both kinds of development are essential. You must show that your own ideas are clear, reasonable, and solid. You must also show how your opposition's case is weak.

Writing paragraphs that confirm or support your proposition is similar to what you've done in the past. Most often you'll state the paragraph's main point in a topic sentence and go on to explain or define key terms, then give specific details that support the topic sentence. Paragraphs refuting the opposition, however, are usually concerned with exploring another person's thinking, especially with pointing out errors of logic and failures of insight. If you can show that your case is strong and the opposition's is weak, chances are excellent that the reader will be on your side at the end--and that's the goal.

Three Argumentative Appeals: Reason, Ethics, Emotion

While there's no infallible formula for winning over every reader in every circumstance, you should learn how and when to use three fundamental argumentative appeals. According to Aristotle, a person who wants to convince another may appeal to that person's reason, ethics, or emotion.

If we think of these three appeals as independent and of the writer as choosing just one, however, we miss the point. The writer's job is to weave the various appeals into a single convincing argument. As you continue to expand and develop your ideas, look for ways of combining the three appeals to create a sound, balanced argument.

Reason

Much of the clear thinking we do in our everyday lives follows logical principles, but in a less formal and systematic way than the thinking of a research scientist. And for most occasions this informal reasoning is adequate. That's not to say your argument can be illogical, only that you shouldn't confuse formal logic with clear thinking or good sense, the essential qualities your argument should display. Briefly, informal reasoning requires clearly linking your general claims with concrete, specific data.

When our thinking begins with specifics and moves toward a generalization, we are moving inductively. That is, if you were to taste several hard, green apples and then draw the general conclusion that all hard, green apples are sour, you would be using inductive reasoning. And, of course, the more apples tasted and the greater the variation in the times and conditions of tasting, the greater the likelihood that your general conclusion would be valid. In your writing, then, when you reason inductively, ask whether you've examined the evidence carefully, whether it justifies your general conclusion, and whether you've given readers enough specific evidence to persuade them that your thinking is sound and your general conclusion is true.

Reasoning that moves in the opposite direction (from general to specific) is called deductive reasoning. Here, you take a general principle that you know to be true and use it to understand a specific situation. For instance, you may know from experience that as a general rule bad weather reduces business at the golf course. You may also learn that today's weather will be cold and rainy. From these two pieces of knowledge, you can produce a third, more specific piece: Business at the golf course will be slow today.

What is not directly stated but only implied is the general principle that students who don't turn in their assignments will fail the course.

Such shortened forms are perfectly acceptable, but only if the underlying links and claims are sound. An opponent may want to refute you by challenging some underlying assumptions in your thinking; likewise, you'll want to look for faulty reasoning when you refute your opposition.

Ethics

No matter how solid your reasoning, readers may not accept your argument unless they're also convinced that you're a person of wisdom, honesty, and good will. If you misrepresent the evidence, misunderstand the implications of your own value structure, or seek to hurt some individual or group, you can expect to alienate your readers.

The appeal to character is often subtle, affecting readers almost unconsciously, yet often decisively.

If you realize that readers are likely to analyze your character and intentions this way, you'll see that the best way to put ethical appeal in your writing is to build a strong, healthy relationship with your readers. Convince them that they can trust you to be fair, honest, well-informed, and well-intentioned. Then, having established that trust, don't betray it.

Emotion

Many people believe that emotional appeals by their very nature subvert reason and are therefore better left to TV hucksters than to writers who want their ideas taken seriously. Because this common view has some validity, emotional appeals must be used with restraint and discretion, or they may prove counterproductive. Nevertheless, while an argument founded mostly on feelings and emotions may be superficial and biased, an argument that is carefully reasoned and honestly presented probably won't be hurt by a bit of pathos. In fact, it may be helped.

One way to build pathos is to illustrate or dramatize an idea. This may involve little more than folding short descriptive and narrative examples into the argument. Are you arguing that your city needs to take stiffer measures against drunk drivers? Why not find a place to include a description of the face of a child who was injured in an accident caused by drinking? Or you might want to tell the story of a driver who caused several accidents because the individual's license was never revoked. Including such narrative and descriptive passages can help readers feel the urgency of your proposition so that it gets beyond the level of abstract intellectual speculation and becomes a matter of immediate human concern.

Careful word choice also influences an argument's emotional appeal. The point here is that the overall emotional texture of your argument is the result of many individual choices about which word to use.

Such choices, even though they must be made one at a time, can't be seen as independent of each other. Their force is cumulative. They communicate how you feel--and by implication think the reader ought to feel--about your subject. If you want the reader to identify with you emotionally, you'll choose words carefully, making sure they're appropriate for you as a writer, for your readers, and for your overall purpose in writing.

Form: Tradition and Innovation

By now, you've probably amassed many notes and ideas for your argument, but you may be wondering how to sort and organize this material into an essay. The following pattern, which gives the traditional Latin names for each section, may help. Like the thesis/support pattern, it offers a basic structural framework that can be modified for various writing contexts. The essential parts include the Introduction, Refutation, and Conclusion.

Introduction

To write a good introduction for an argumentative essay you have to identify the controversy surrounding the issue and state the thesis or your proposition.

However, argumentation assumes conflicting viewpoints. Avoid a proposition which is merely factual. What is obviously true or commonly accepted allows little room for debate. Moreover, your proposition should not be a fact, too vague, too board or too narrow. It should be something debatable where one can say "Yes it is" or "No it isn't".

Refutation

Acknowledge and refute differing viewpoints:

(1) Argumentation focuses on controversial issues, you should also take opposing views into account.

(2) A good argument seeks out contrary viewpoints, acknowledges them, perhaps even admits they have some merit.

(3) However, you can refute all or part of their views. Refutation means pointing out problems with dissenting views and thereby strengthening your position/argument.

Although many people think that grades are a good means of differentiating more able students from less able students (opposing view point), not all students are good at test taking (refutation --writer's opinion). This does not mean that the latter are less able.

Conclusion

Whatever you do, end strongly. Finish with conviction. After all, if you aren't convinced, why should your reader be? You might end with an amplification (ringing conclusion), a review of your main points, a reference to something in your introduction, or a plea for action. You might also invite and facilitate defections from the opposition.

Adapting the Argumentative Pattern

Except for the fact that an introduction by definition demands the first spot and a conclusion the last, other sections can be moved around in a variety of effective ways. If the traditional order--introduction, statement of case, refutation, confirmation, conclusion--doesn't suit your needs, try an alternative.

1. Open with the introduction.

2. Refute the strongest opposition point.

3. State the case.

4. Confirm your proposition.

5. Refute the weaker opposition points.

6. End with the conclusion.

1. Open with the introduction.

2. Offer your proposition as an open question.

3. State the case.

4. Examine and refute the opposition.

5. Examine and confirm your proposition.

6. Conclude that your proposition should be accepted.

1. Open with the introduction.

2. Offer a rival proposition.

3. Offer your own proposition.

4. Confirm your proposition.

5. Refute the opposition.

6. End with the conclusion.

Pro and Con Chart
Proposition: The Medical Records department should set up an incentive program that pays all transcriptionists a bonus of ten cents a line for all lines typed over nine hundred a day.
For (Pro)	Against (Con)
1. Faster typists would produce more lines.	1. Typists would not do other duties, such as paper work.
2. Faster typists would make more money.	2. Typists would try to type the easier reports.
3. One less transcriptionist would be needed.	3. Typists would do a poorer quality of work.
4. One less word processing machine would be needed.	4. Slower typists would be mad.
5. Less office space would be needed.	5. Typists could make more money than the boss.
6. One less benefit package would be needed.	6. Other people in the department would be mad.
7. Less overtime would be required.
8. Less sick time would be paid.