ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING

Vaida Miseviciute
 WHAT IS A GOOD ARGUMENT?
• It is controversial
• Thesis states exactly what is being argued
• Definition of all terms is used
• A clear focus on the question
• Adequate evidence to support the argument
• Clear and logical reasoning
• Anticipation of contrary argument and
evidence
 CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS

• Make sure somebody disagrees with you

• The more balls come at you, the easier to say your
topic is controversial.
• Every day arguments sometimes are born because
of lack of knowledge. Get into an argument only
when you know for sure it is a worthy fight.
 A CLEAR THESIS
• An argument is a fight – you need to have a
strong position if you want to win. Do not
change your position from left to right!

• All nations should make peace their goal.

• The solution to peace is diplomacy.

• In a written argument you must choose ONE

side and defend it. Think before you choose a
position.
 A DEFINITION OF TERMS
• No definition may cause people who would
otherwise agree with you disagree.
Teachers in public schools should be allowed to
control behavior of their students.
• Does control mean spanking? Expelling
from school?
• Does it mean in the classroom only? Or
cafeteria? School grounds? Halls?
 ADEQUATE EVIDENCE
• An example is not evidence enough because
there is always a counter example
• Statistics, facts, research, observations,
experience, etc.
OPPOSING VIEW AND REFUTATION

• You must acknowledge the opinion of an

opposing view, so your argument in the way
goes like this:
• What color is this seagull?
• I think this seagull is white, but some people
think that it is grey. I would like to provide three
reasons that would prove that in fact, it is white.
OFFERING A COUNTERARGUMENT
• Counter argument should be
inspired by specific examples
you have in your support.
• Counterarguments should be
specific and detailed. Reasons
for the opposing point need to
be explained.
• If you cannot find any
objections or concessions, then
you are probably not writing an
argumentative paper!
RESPONDING TO COUNTERARGUMENT

• Refutation • Concession
Answering to Partial disagreement
opposing view with You give in to part of
complete the other person's
disagreement views. You admit there
are valid points to
some extent.
 PHRASES FOR REFUTATION

• I don’t think so! • I wonder whether that’s the

• I disagree case
• Hmmm, I’m not sure about that..
• I disagree entirely
• I’m afraid I can’t agree • I’m not so sure about that

• I’m afraid you’re wrong • I’m not so certain

• Well, I’m not sure whether you
• On the contrary!
can really ...
• Definitely not!
• Well, it depends...
• I’m inclined to disagree with
that...
 PHRASES FOR CONCESSION
• That may be true, but
• That might have been the case once, but
• You may be right aabout…., but
• ..Maybe...But the problem is...
• That’s a good point, but...
• That would be great, except that...
• That may be so, but...
• Possibly, but...
• ...,but what I’m concerned with is...
• ..., but what I’m afraid of is...
• ..., but what bothers me is...
 OUTLINE OF AN ARGUMENT

Hook (surprising statistics, quote)

Intro Background (history of a problem/definitions)
Thesis (focused)

Topic sentence –your claim one at a time

Explanation of a claim
Support
Body specific detailed examples
Opposing view
Refutation

Restated thesis
Concl Concluding comments
Solution driven
 INTRODUCTION
• Hook
• Background information (Wh? Questions)
• When did this argument/problem start?
• What is this argument/problem?

• Authority
• Why is it interesting to me?
• How do I know about it?

• Clear thesis
 BODY PARAGRAPHS
Style 1 Style 2
• Your first reason for • Your first reason for this
this argument argument

• Explanation of the • Explanation of the

reason reason
• Opposing view
• Proof of your position
• Refutation
• Opposing view
• More proof of your
• Refutation position
 SUPPORT
Selecting reasons: Choose relevant ones. Consider ones that
are mostly arguable from your opponents perspective.

• Topic sentence + explanation

• 2 examples—specific and detailed (from sources)
• Examples need to be integrated
• Need to be analyzed
• Need to offer opposing view (specific to examples)
• Need to refute (specific to opposing view)
• Concluding sentence
 EXAMPLE CONCESSION 1:
• While censorship is dangerous to a free society, some of
the concerned citizens who are in favor of censorship may
have valid points when they object that children should not
be exposed to television violence. [Here you have made a
concession and anticipated an objection in one
sentence.] Indeed, often there is too much violence on
television [Again, a concession, a point of agreement.]
Perhaps the answer is for all networks to establish the
same guidelines of self-censorship [Here I offer a partial
solution most can agree on.] If the networks were more
responsible and tried to avoid material that is in poor taste,
governmental officials, religious groups, and concerned
parents might not feel the need to be involved in their
decisions at all.
http://www.rscc.cc.tn.us/owl&writingcenter/OWL/Argumentation.html
 EXAMPLE CONCESSION 2:
It is true, word-processors are less expensive than
computers. [You meet the big objection dead on. The
concession is your agreement.] However, we must also
consider the cost of servicing and supplies, which are
much higher for word-processors than they are for
computers, making word processors less expensive only in
the short run. Additionally, a computer is capable of many
tasks, while a word-processor alone is not. As our business
grows, we can easily expand our computer software to
meet new needs, such as spreadsheet and desktop
publishing capabilities.
http://www.rscc.cc.tn.us/owl&writingcenter/OWL/Argumentation.html
 CONTENT—CRITICAL THINKING

Patterns of Written Discourse. Kaplan (1966)

English-linear, direct, and explicit.

Semitic –series of parallel sentences. Coordination is preferred over
subordination.
Oriental—topic never addressed head on. View of different angles around and
around the point
Romance-conversations may digress to add richness to the message.
Russian- like romance but favors parallel constructions.
Socratic (Western-Anglo Confucian (Asian)
American)
Objectivity and proof Ambiguity and vagueness (harmony and
“Voice:” clear, overt, expressive, assertive, understanding between readers
and even demonstrative (Atkinsol, 1997) (Hirokawa, 1987; Hinds, 1983). Value for
what it leaves for interpretation by
audience (Carson, 1992; Yamada, 1997;
Harklau, 1994

To seek to find truth and universal To gain wisdom to act appropriately

definitions

SS are asked to think for themselves SS listen as to learn from a perfect

Individualism: exploration and expression example.
of “self”. Purpose of writing is to reflect “Scholarly voice” to pass on what one
on information through personal has received (Scollon, 1991)
experiences to uncover unique “Scientific” voice—facts speak for
perspective on life (Li, 1996) themselves (Leki, 1995)
Good writing should carry a
profound moral message, reiteration
of a popular witticism or what elders
preached (Li, 1996)
Socratic (Western-Anglo
American)
Ts question to help “give birth” to a
truth that lies within
Taking the “odd angle” or a creative
perspective (Leki, 1995)
Value of text: Philosopher rises above his
own text. Belcher (1995) –understanding
that authorities are made not by virtue of
status but by standing up to criticism
within a peer group.
Confucian (Asian)
Ts question and provide perfect
answers. I transmit but do not
innovate. Truthful in what I say and
devoted to antiquity (Lau, 1983)
By virtue of writing, the author is credible
and knowledgeable. Texts are studies
because they stood the test of time.
(Scollon, 1999)
 CREDIBILITY IN ARGUMENTATION
Rhetorical devices Inner circle of English (Kachru, Outer circle of writing
1988)

Proverbs/sayings Proverb authority is questioned strengthen position. Assumes

(Many people say…, A proverb in and not seen as credible. common knowledge. Represents
my country…, a common saying unquestioned support. Avoiding
is…) responsibility for the truth-value
of the proposition.

Direct personal appeal (YOU. Avoid! Achieve mutual understanding

Don’t wait for the sign to come to and solidarity with readers.
you, decide and stick with your Give force to argument.
choice)

Opposing view (some people Long and detailed without Formulaic as taught in ESL classes
believe, others…) sentence-level contradictions. Seen as purpose-defeating
Build credibility

Generalizations (Nowadays… Not liked Accepted as writer’s responsibility

people in my country…, in Require proof for the truth and accuracy of a
Lithuania…, in todays world) position that can be applied to
most audiences

Hinkel,questions
Rhetorical 1999 (what can we Avoid Stand in place of thesis statement
do to solve this problem? Do you Excessively personal Assume audience participation
know what is the most and involvement
important…..is?)