ARGUMENTATION

What Is Argumentation?

Argumentation = using logic, reason, evidence, and language to support a position and convince readers that it is the best position regarding a particular issue.

Essentially, you're taking a side on an important arguable topic and then backing that position up so well that you convince readers—even resistant readers—that your position is sound.

Resistant reader = one who is likely to disagree with your position from the start, one who's going to need some pretty strong reasons to be convinced to share your views on the issue.

Think about it—your writing isn't very useful if you're only trying to convince people who already share your views.  What's the point in that?  Recall that one of the most important aspects of college/professional writing is that it has a purpose; you have to be helping the reader learn something or see the situation in a new way.  Otherwise, you've wasted both their time and yours.

The challenge—and the  purpose—is to convince people who don't share your views or who are undecided. 

This can be pretty difficult to accomplish…

 

How do I effectively address resistant readers? 

Remember what we mean by "argument."

This is a scenario in which readers are interested in what you have to say, but are going to require sound evidence before they believe you.

You must expect that readers will not automatically agree with what you say.  In fact, they might offer objections.

Nevertheless, this  is not a dispute involving anger, insult, or simple stubbornness. The tone is professional and driven by logic rather than emotion.

Argumentation involves making a strong claim.

This means that both your topic and your position must be debatable.  Argumentation cannot function without that element.

Remember that another of the most important differences between college/professional writing and high school/amateur writing is the inclusion of an argument—i.e., you're not just writing a book report.

Argumentation must also be persuasive—you have to give your reader good reasons to share your views.

This means more than solid evidence and logic.  It also means being ethically manipulative—choosing the right words and examples to subtly and almost subconsciously influence the reader.

"Ethically manipulative" means that you must remain fair, honest, and honorable throughout.

Like we said earlier, this is tricky…

You’ve (hopefully) been doing something like this throughout your college career—writing about positions that are debatable & trying to sway your readers toward sharing them.

In a Comp 1 comparison-contrast essay, for example, you might have made the  argument that domestic cars are better than foreign cars in an attempt to  persuade readers to buy domestic vehicles. 

How Argumentation is Special

As its own independent pattern, argumentation does more than push a position.

Pattern = the type of writing you're doing (comparison-contrast, cause-effect, classification, argumentation, etc.)

The first thing you need is several good reasons why your position is the best one.

DO THIS FIRST!   As you'll see in a few minutes, there are several other things that you must do in argumentation, but the focus of the essay must still be your own independent reasons for why your position is the right one.

Don't get your main points mixed up with the later sections of the essay.

You're driving this car—the focus is on  your reasons, not anyone else's. 

Brainstorm, develop, and organize strong and convincing reasons.  No argument can succeed without them.

Be strong, but also be in clear control of yourself and your argument. 

Take a look at this image:

Which do you think is most likely to win in an academic argument?

It's very important to understand that argumentation assumes controversy.

This means you are aware that there will be strong opposition to your position.

If you're making a pro-life argument, for instance, you know in advance that there are many pro-choice readers who will throw up objections to your argument.

To compensate for this,  argumentation writing must contain an acknowledgement/refutation section .

Acknowledgement and Refutation

Acknowledgement = acknowledging the strongest/most likely objections that your opponents will bring up and discussing the opponent's reasons for these objections fully and openly.

  …But…you can't just let their objections slide, right? So…

Refutation = overcoming your opponent's objections by demonstrating that your argument is still the superior one.

Essentially, the acknowledgement sets up your opposition's objections so that your refutation can knock them neatly down.

This is sort of like a pre-emptive strike—you overcome their objections   before they even have the chance to bring them up themselves.

It's sort of like those ducks at the fair…you're setting them up just so you can show how skillful you are by knocking them down again.

Let's take a look at how this works in real life:

Pretend you're back in high school.  A few friends call to ask if you want to go to New Orleans for the weekend.  Of course you do, but you know that your parents and grandparents are going to have strong objections to it.  Because you know it's going to be difficult to convince them, you don't just rush into the living room and blurt out your request.  You take some time to think about what reasons you can offer for why you should go, what their particular objections are going to be, and how you can overcome those objections. 

Your strategy might look something like this:

1—Several good reasons for why I should go to NO:

It's a great chance to experience a rich history and culture.

I've worked very hard and stayed out of trouble, so I deserve a reward.

It will let me practice independence in the real world.

2—Acknowledgment—What objections will they raise?

Granny is very religious and is going to say that New Orleans is a den of sin and immorality.

Dad is very protective and will say that New Orleans is too dangerous.

Mom had a brother who died because he was drinking and driving, so she'll say that any place that involves drinking will encourage drunk driving and therefore the chance of losing my life.

3—Refutation—How am I going to overcome each of these objections?

I can point out to Granny that NO has more churches per square foot than any other place on earth and that we plan to visit some, so it's actually a very religious place.

I can tell Dad that a large group is going—including the entire defensive line of the football team—so no one will mess with us.

I can tell Mom how our preacher's daughter has signed a designated driver pledge in church and will be driving for the entire trip.

See how much more likely you are to be persuasive if you offer good main points and also acknowledge and overcome your parents' objections before they even have the chance to bring them up themselves?

You're demonstrating that you've put a lot of thought into the matter, that you've considered their position and reasons, and that you're still confident that your position is the best one.

This makes you look knowledgeable, unbiased, competent, and confident.

Keep main points and ack/ref entirely separate from one another!

NOTICE how your main points are totally separate from your acknowledgement/refutation?  This is very important!

Your acknowledgement and refutation are in conversation with each other—i.e., your refutation responds to your acknowledgement.

This  is not what should be happening with your main points.  Your acknowledgement/refutation should not be in conversation with/responding to your main points in any way.

Failing to keep your main points separate from your acknowledgement/refutation will make your writing redundant, which will lead to unsuccessful writing. 

ALWAYS START BY PLANNING OUT YOUR MAIN POINTS FIRST!

Only after you've planned out your own position will you start taking into consideration the opposition's views and how to overcome them.

Requirements:

Remember that argumentation must contain an acknowledgement/refutation section. 

Without it, your writing isn't really formal argumentation.  This means that you'll get a grade of zero on the assignment.

Knock 'em down in the same order you set 'em up.

In other words, if you acknowledge Granny's objections first, Dad's second, and Mumzy's last, when you get to your refutation you should address Granny's objections first, Dad's second, and Mumzy's last.  Keep it in a logical order. 

Address at least three of the opposition's objections in your acknowledgement. 

You use three main points to back up your own argument, right?  Allowing them three objections shows that you're willing to give them an even playing field, that you're not afraid to address more than one problem they have with your argument, and that your argument is superior for many different reasons.

Your acknowledgement must address the opposition's strongest and best objections, not their weakest.

If you ignore their strongest objections, you start to look pretty bad to the reader.  The reader will immediately ask "But what about…?" and wonder why you left that important objection out.  This makes you look afraid of the opposition, unknowledgeable about both sides of the issue, and/or biased.

A few more things…

Your refutations should be longer than your acknowledgements.

For each of their objections, try to offer two or three reasons why those objections aren't strong/valid.

Knock 'em down in more ways than one!

Putting a bullet in each one of those fair ducks shows you're skilled. Putting two or three bullets in each of them shows that you're a master.

Use transitions to indicate clearly which are  your arguments and which are the opposition's. 

Use phrases like "The opposition might claim that…" and "Opponents say…" to indicate the opponent's arguments.

Use phrases like "However, they are wrong because…" when you switch back to your own position in the refutation.

Without this, it'll sound like you're just switching from one side to another throughout your writing.  The reader won't be able to tell what's your argument and what's the opposition's.

All body paragraphs should have topic sentences and closing sentences.

This includes the acknowledgement and refutation paragraphs!

EX: The opposition claims that abortion should be allowed because it is a woman’s body and therefore a woman’s choice what to do with it.  Therefore, they argue, a woman should not be forced to have a child if she does not choose to do so.  Pregnancy takes a physical and mental toll on the body and the mind, and a woman should be allowed to decide if she wants to undergo these trials.  The woman’s body is changed forever in the wake of pregnancy.  As such, the opposition insists that forcing a woman to undergo a full pregnancy is denying her the right to control her own body.

EX: What the opposition is overlooking, however, is that there are others who also have rights to their own bodies.  By their own logic they are admitting that an individual should have some say in what happens to her body.  These rights should extend to the preborn child as well.  The baby should have a stake in what happens to its body.  Similarly, fathers should have some input in what happens to their children.  The logical conclusion is that all humans, not just the mother, should have a right to choose what happens to their own bodies, and abortion takes that right from the preborn child.

Language details make a big difference!  Be sure to bear this in mind.

Notice how we’re carefully choosing our language to underscore our argument?  Because we’re arguing the pro-life position, we use words like “baby,” “child,” and “preborn.”

How might are language choices be different if we were arguing the pro-choice position?

Instead of “baby” or “child,” we might use words like “fetus” or “embryo.”  Instead of “preborn,” we might say “unborn.”

Context is essential in argumentation.

You have to provide relevant historical/background details to illustrate the situation clearly, define any advanced/technical terms you'll be using, and explain any difficult/complicated concepts or theories in a way that will make them understandable to a general audience.

Remember: The gap between you and a general audience gets wider as you become more knowledgeable in your field.  Never assume that they'll already know specialized information.

For instance, if your argument is that not allowing same-sex marriage violates basic civil rights, you'll need to establish what civil rights are, what the definition of "marriage" is (or should be), and even how marriage has changed over time and across cultures.

Recommended structure:

Section 1: Introduction

A paragraph that gets your reader's attention, introduces your topic, and presents your thesis.

Section 2: Context

One or two paragraphs that give the necessary contextual info

Section 3: Main points

Although we've broken away from the 5-paragraph model, it's still good to have at least 3 strong main points. 

Section 4: Acknowledgement/refutation

This paragraph acknowledges the opposition's first objection, discusses it in detail, then refutes it by pointing out its weaknesses.

Section 5: Conclusion

A paragraph that restates your thesis, revisits your main points, emphasizes the significance, and brings the essay to a sound close.

This outline is just a random example.  We're not claiming that it does or does not reflect our personal beliefs.  We're just practicing argumentation.

Introduction

Provide a hook and pave the way for your thesis.  Imagine that your thesis draft is "Abortion should be made illegal because it is detrimental to the rights and well-being of the human race." 

Context

You'll probably want to define what "life" is and when it really begins and also explain a bit about the abortion process and the laws regarding it.

Main points

Your main points might be that life begins at conception, that all life should be given a chance to live, and that abortion damages the mother both physically and emotionally.

Acknowledgement/refutation

Acknowledgment 1: The opposition claims that it is a woman's body and therefore her right to choose what she does with it.

Refutation:  If this is true, the baby should have rights to its own body, as well.  Also, what about the rights of the father?  Similarly, the mother has already made a choice about her body when she decides to have sex.

Acknowledgement 2: The opposition might also say that abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest. 

Refutation: However, the baby should not be denied the right to life because it's a product of rape or incest.  This is punishing the child for the sin of the parent.  Also, sometimes a blessing like  a child can come  as a result of tragedy.

Acknowledgement 3: Finally, pro-life advocates argue that it is irresponsible to bring a baby into the world when the mother can't support it.

Refutation: Yet the opposition is forgetting that adoption is always an option.  This will be  giving another couple who can't have children a chance to experience the joy of childrearing.  Also, having sex without proper precautions or when one cannot support a child is in itself an irresponsible action.  Not living up to the responsibility of having the child is only adding more irresponsibility to the situation.

Conclusion

Restate your thesis, revisit your main points, emphasize the significance of the situation, and provide a sound closing.

Pay attention to all of the examples!

Notice how the main points are not in conversation with the acknowledgement/refutation.

Notice how we refute each of the opponent's objections with more than one refutation.  This strengthens your position.

Notice how we're using transitions like "The opposition claims that" to indicate the opponent's arguments and then words like "However" when we move back into our own voice to refute.  We also use words like "also" and "Finally" to indicate the order of our acknowledgements.  This helps keep things clear for our readers.

Be open to flexibility.

It’s important to remember that the details of your argument might change as you move through your acknowledgement and refutation.

You might have to add a detail or revise an earlier claim to cover all your bases.

This is normal.  Don’t be afraid to do it!  Writing is a “work in progress” and is expected to change right up until the final draft is submitted.

Argumentation Paper Requirements:

You will be required to use at least 3 strong sources in this paper.

Sources must be scholarly.

A correctly formatted works cited page is required.

Use the MLA guidelines to correctly format your paper, citations, and works cited page.

You can go ahead and start looking for sources now, but wait until you  understand what scholarly sources are before you start writing the paper.  Non-scholarly sources will hurt your paper rather than helping it.

HEADS UP: Dictionaries, encyclopedias, newspapers, popular magazines, and most websites are  not scholarly sources.

There is no set length requirement for this assignment.

Part of being a Comp 2 student is being able to tell on your own how much is enough to prove your argument.

However, be aware that papers less than 2 full pages are not very likely to get a good grade.

There's just too much that you have to do in argumentation to cover in less than 2 full pages.

Your argument has to be informed, intelligent, and reflect that you've put significant thought and research into the issue.

Plan to spend  many hours planning, writing, and polishing this paper.  If you only spend a few hours on it, your grade will be ugly.

Remember: Comp 2 has higher standards than Comp 1!