discussion

ENG122: Composition II An Introduction to Argument

P a g e | 1

English 122: Composition II

An Introduction to Argument

Argument and Rhetoric An argument can take many forms. An academic argument, at its root, a method for communicating a singular position with evidence, logic, and persuasion. There are essential

elements to all valid arguments, though they may take different forms.

1. Claim

2. Evidence

3. Counterargument

4. Rebuttal

A successful argument depends upon the delicate balance

between these elements. Imagine a teeter-totter at the

playground. The claim is the basis of the argument, much

like the base of the teeter-totter. A big opposing viewpoint,

called the counterargument, is constantly pushing down on

one side or the other. Balance can only be achieved by

providing enough evidence to support the claim along with rebuttal of the counterargument.

Essentially, an argument depends on research (evidence) and finding flaws in opposing

viewpoints (rebuttal). Each claim made in an argument needs this support to be valid.

Any time you begin to write, you must analyze the rhetorical situation. This means

identifying the best way to appeal to your audience, and there are three possible appeals: logos, ethos, and pathos. These three items form a triangle that will frame your project. Let’s take each item and apply it to an argument.

First, we will consider the writer. It seems obvious that you are the writer. However, who are

you? Are you a student at a university or are you something else? When writing academic

papers, try to set your other interests and behaviors aside and write as a scholar. This will make

you a credible writer. Aristotle referred to the credibility

of a speaker or writer as ethos. Ethos is very important

when presenting an argument. To persuade readers to

agree with you, writing must be clearly credible (and ethical--considering was it good for everyone).

Next, let’s think about the audience. For most papers, the

audience will be Ashford University. How can you

appeal to this audience? University students, faculty, and

staff are educated, detail-oriented, smart, and play a big

role in your success at school. You must find a way to

reach this audience and impress them with your ability

to use shared values and culture to persuade the reader.

Aristotle used the term pathos to describe the humanistic appeal to emotion and values of your

audience. But appealing to emotions often involves logical fallacies, so be mindful not to rely on those to make your argument.

ENG122: Composition II An Introduction to Argument

P a g e | 2

A research-based paper will rely heavily upon logos, Aristotle’s term for an appeal to reason

and logic. An argument will also require attention to reason and logic to be credible. A simple

formula for logos in an argument is claim + evidence = credible argument. Other factors, such

as counterarguments and rebuttals, can also play a role in this equation. All factors should be

analyzed in a logical manner to add credibility to an academic argument.

Two common types of argument are Classic and Rogerian. How do the four elements of an

argument fit into these two styles? How do the three points of the rhetorical triangle fit into

each style?

Classic and Rogerian Arguments

Classic (Aristotelian) Argument

Classic or traditional argument is rooted in Greek philosophy and rhetoric. Aristotle believed

that every valid argument contained a syllogism. At its roots, a syllogism is nothing more than a

statement with evidence to support it. The key to understanding how a syllogism works is the

ability to evaluate or generate proper evidence. In the classical form, this evidence should work

to convince an audience of the author’s contentions in a fashion that not only supports their

argument’s major claim, but rebuts all alternative arguments in a way that is both logical and

decorous. Remember, it is crucial to win your audience over with logic and credibility, but one

can only accomplish that feat by courting the audience with rhetoric: “The art of using language

so as to persuade or influence others; the body of rules to be observed by a speaker or writer in

order that he may express himself with eloquence” (Oxford English Dictionary, 1910). The

structure below is a basic outline of how a classic argument is constructed. The sections do not

represent paragraphs; they represent distinct segments of an argumentative essay and, with the

exception of the introduction and thesis statement, the body of an essay can be situated in any

fashion that is most effective at convincing a given audience.

Section One: Introduction and Thesis—Your introduction should describe the rhetorical

situation and give a clear forecast of the material you will cover in your essay. Your thesis

statement should make a clear, limited, descriptive assertion and explain why your stance

matters. Example: Failure to pass the recent gun law is a bad move for public safety because

inexperienced, mentally ill, and unethical people will continue to have access to firearms.

Section Two: Present the position that you most agree with. Then, give ample evidence to

support why you hold this view. (Do not use first-person. Use third-person narrative).

Section Three: Present the position that you most disagree with. Then, validate the perspective

with a circumstance or situation in which that viewpoint could or might be correct.

Section Four: While remaining non-offensive in language and style, provide a rebuttal of the

opposition’s stance by pointing out its fallacies or lack of logos and ethos.

Section Five: Conclusion—Provide a sound but brief explanation of your argument and further

direction for your reader.

ENG122: Composition II An Introduction to Argument

P a g e | 3

Consensual (Rogerian) Argument

The consensual or Rogerian method is based on the notion that many contentious issues,

subjects, problems, etc. can be solved by identifying the “common ground” of all parties

involved and working together toward a common goal. Common ground is the shared values,

concerns, and constraints of each party. There are no clear winners or losers in this type of

argument style. The key is that both (or various) parties profit in some defined fashion while

making concessions or changes that benefit the traditionally labeled opposition. The structure

below is a basic outline of how a consensual (common ground) argument is constructed. The

sections do not represent paragraphs; they represent distinct segments of an argumentative essay

and, with the exception of the introduction and thesis statement, the body of an essay can be

situated in any fashion that is most effective at convincing a given audience.

Section One: Introduction and Thesis—Your introduction should describe the rhetorical

situation and give the audience a clear forecast of the material you will cover in your essay.

Your thesis statement should make a clear, limited, descriptive assertion and explain why

your stance matters. However, you need to remember to argue for a solution that is

acceptable to both perspectives. Your thesis should clearly state a type of compromise. You

should then be able to expand on that compromise in Section Three. Example: Though video

games often have positive educational value, children should not be allowed to play video

games until they are 13 years old.

Section Two: Present the perspective that you disagree with the most. Make sure you do so with

fair language, and fully develop the perspective from the constraints in which the stance

might be most valid—i.e. no one is wrong all the time. In what circumstance might this

perspective be the most correct to select?

Section Three: Present the most valid perspective using logic, credibility, and ample evidence.

Your research should guide you in the creation of this section.

Section Four: Create common ground/ a Rogerian solution. This section should convince your

audience that the opposing perspective will benefit from your stance. The key here is not to

point out why the opposing perspective is faulty, but to explain why your perspective serves

the greater good or is more logical in the given constraints and how it benefits the opposing

perspective.

Conclusion: Provide a wrap up and continuation of your Rogerian solution. It should also

include direction for your audience (i.e., no subject can be completely solved). Therefore,

you should work toward plausible solutions rather than absolute remedies.