Revise

Enchanted Education

Article critiquing stands as one of the strategies that are used to dig deeper into the con-

tent of an article and to make a judgment if the article was written in a coherent manner and if

the authors were cautious enough to consider the audience. The article that will be critiqued in

this case will be "They Say, I Say" which was written by Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein.

The article focuses on some of the significant factors to consider while writing an argumentative

essay. The main aim is to look into the arguments of the authors and try to prove if they are au-

thentic and if there are any biases evident.

The first argument is that the authors have made that good argumentative writing begins

with listening rather than an assertion. I agree with this argument, and this is because of different

reasons. The first reason is associated with the basics of an argument. When writing about any

argumentative essay, it is imperative to note that there is the promotion of an argument. An ar-

gument cannot be balanced if it is a representation of the thoughts of one single person. For an

argument to pass the test, it must engage more than one person. The main aim in writing an ar-

gumentative essay is not to only air the views of the author, but it is also to make sure that the

contribution of other parties is included (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). In this respect, it is evident

that if the contribution of others is not included, there are no arguments because all that is jotted

down is a representation of the author’s thoughts and assumptions.

The second reason why I agreed with the argument of the authors is because an argument

should foster views from different perspectives. The article states that argumentative writing

should not be an assertion of one's thoughts, but it should be an inclusion of different perspec-

tives and that foster engagements. It is imperative to note that there is no way to promote the

contributions of different people and collecting of diverse views if the listening aspect is not

promoted (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). A rich argumentative writing should have ideas that are

diverse and ideas that represent the thoughts and opinions of many people.

The third reason why I agree with the argument is because biases in argumentative writ-

ing must be eliminated. An argument should be a representation of views that are from different

perspectives. In this respect, it is evident that biases can only be eliminated through listening to

what others have to say. Biases are promoted when only one point of view is considered to be the

only right point of view. The best way to eliminate this is to make sure that every person con-

tributes to the argument. The contribution of others cannot be factored in if there is no platform

that gives them an avenue to air what they believe to be right. It is at this point where the aspect

of listening comes in handy.

The authors make a good argument about one fitting in the shoes of others when making

an argument. The argument brings out the essentiality of being accommodative in writing any

argumentative piece. I support this argument cause the best that one is able to represent the

thoughts of others is by being in their shoes. Being in the shoes of others means seeing things

from the perspective of others, and this promotes a healthy argument. At the same time, it pro-

motes an argument that is diverse and rich (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). It is essential to note that

an argument must stand out and the best way to stand out is by presenting different arguments

and being ready deal with the counter-arguments.

In argumentative writing, the best way to deal with counter-arguments is by accommodat-

ing the views of others who hold a different position. The authenticity of an argument is likely to

be doubted if the argument tends to take one point of view (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). In this

respect, it is essential to note that the aspect of listening is essential. When the authors state that

there is a need to listen, they mean that it is imperative to accommodate the different views that

might be present (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). I agree with the argument because following the

advice that has been provided by the authors is likely to foster a rich argument that is supported

by facts and where the facts are collected from different points of view. Therefore, by following

the advice of the authors, the authenticity of an argument is promoted, and the biases are com-

pletely eliminated.

The article has provided an argument that has a basis and is helpful, but there are unspo-

ken beliefs which are evident. When the authors emphasize the need to listen before asserting,

they make one assumption which is associated with the biases. The authors make it look like a

person cannot eliminate biases in the absence of the second party. This unspoken belief is far

much from the reality (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). It is very imperative to note that the mind of

a person is created in a way that it can look into different issues from different perspectives

(Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). For example, it’s evident that before a person makes a decision, he

or she thinks of the positive consequences and negative consequences. This is proof that the

mind of a person can make an argument from two different perspectives.

The article tries to argue that the mind of a person is naturally biased and that is why

there is a need for a different party or different parties that argue differently (Graff & Birken-

stein, 2010). I find this argument problematic because this argument in itself is an assumption

that is biased. The essentiality of another party in making an argument cannot be refuted; howev-

er, this should be argued from the perspective of collecting information from diverse perspectives

(Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). Arguing this point of view from a perspective of making outright

assumptions that the mind of a human being is naturally biased is inappropriate.

The belief that listening promotes a wide variety of information is also problematic in this

case. It is no doubt that it is paramount for one to listen before focusing on an argument. Howev-

er, it is not a guarantee that every person who provides information provides it from a different

point of view (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). The authors made this argument in a way that they

demonstrate that they mean every person who might be offering information must be focusing on

a different perspective. Sometimes one might ends up listening to many people and get the in-

formation from the same point of view. It is not obvious that any other person who might con-

tribute on a topic must have different views and that indicates that the authors presented unspo-

ken beliefs.

The article also states that the ideas of a person should be stated as a response to others,

“It is the importance not only of expressing your ideas (“I say”) but of presenting those ideas as a

response to some other person or group.” In this respect, there is an argument that is not spoken

or written down which is evident. An response is supposed to provide an argument that offers a

solution or answers to a question or argument that has been brought forth. Therefore, when the

aspect of response comes in place, it is evident that one is supposed to be answering another ar-

gument. In this case, an assumption has already been make that any person who engages in the

argument must be holding different views which are contrary to the views of the author. The ar-

gument has unspoken beliefs which cannot substantiated.

The authors failed to consider some factors despite the fact that they presented rich argu-

ments that could be substantiated. The first factor is the correlation of arguments that are pre-

sented. Looking at the content that has been presented, it is evident that the authors try to state

that a good argument should have different views that have been presented by different persons.

The aspect of listening creates an avenue when the writer accommodates the views of others

(Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). However, at times, an argument may not hold the weight that it

needs to for it to be considered as a strong argument. For example, a person may make an argu-

ment without all the knowledge in the field or topic of argument. But, after being exposed to the

knowledge in the field, the person may change the argument not because he or she has been co-

erced to do so but because he or she has learned about the facts and has decided to change the

point of view.

Some arguments start from different perspectives but end up using the same point of view

to argue the topic in question. In this case, but not only the listener compromises his or her posi-

tion but the second party also compromises his or her position (Graff & Birkenstein, 2010). In

this respect, it is evident that making an assumption that an argument must have different points

of view is unjustified. The authors failed to look into this issue from this perspective thus pro-

moting biases. It is imperative to look at the issue of argument from all perspectives.

References

Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2010). “They Say, I Say” The Moves that Matter in Academic

Writing: Second Edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.