This is a direct quote from: CSU Writing Center at writing.colostate.edu/guides/index.cfm?guides_active=argument&category1=31
Inductive Reasoning
When an audience completely disagrees with your position convincing them that their reasons for disagreeing are faulty before presenting your own position may be the best strategy.
Introduction: States the issue to be addressed and why it is important.
Body of Argument: Examines positions already proposed and refutes each one, showing why they are inadequate. Typically organized like this.
• Position 1
• Your refutation of position 1
• Position 2
• Your refutation of position 2
Alternatively, all positions might be examined first and then refuted second.
• Position 1
• Position 2
• Your refutation of position 1
• Your refutation of position 2
Conclusion/Position Statement: Once all other positions are shown to be inadequate, conclude with your position as the only logical choice. This is where you argue your point. At the end. Hah. See I told you sometimes you hold off on your thesis until the audience is good and ready to hear it.
When an audience partially disagrees with your position, the best strategy still looks a great deal like when they completely disagree: convincing them that their reasoning is faulty before presenting your own position.
Introduction: States the issue to be addressed and why it is important.
Body of Argument: Examines positions already proposed and refutes each one, showing why they are inadequate. Typically organized like this.
* Position 1
* Your refutation of position 1
* Position 2
* Your refutation of position 2
Alternatively, all positions might be examined first and then refuted second.
* Position 1
* Position 2
* Your refutation of position 1
* Your refutation of position 2
Position Statement: Introduced as the only logical choice after the positions your audience finds most persuasive are shown to be inadequate.
Presentation of Evidence: Supports your position as not only reasonable, but the best one available as well.
Showing posts with label styles of argument. Show all posts
Showing posts with label styles of argument. Show all posts
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Writing Process--Organization-Deductive Method
Deductive Reasoning
The traditional academic argument is deductive, placing the author's position in the introduction and devoting the rest of the argument to presenting the evidence. Unless you are in a field where inductive reasoning is the norm, you can hardly go wrong with this method.
In some cases, all the evidence may be directed at proving the main point; in others, each piece may lead to a sub-point that needs proving before a convincing argument for the main point can be made. Depending on how directly each piece of evidence relates to the position, a deductive argument can be organized in a variety of ways.
* Introduction establishing the context of the argument as well as the author's position.
* Body of Evidence presented, depending on the audience analysis, from most to least, or least to most convincing.
* Conclusion summarizing the argument, presenting a call to action, or suggesting further research.
An argument supporting a ban on logging in rain forests might first need to establish and provide evidence regarding five other environmental premises, each supporting the author's position, regarding the effects of logging. For instance:
• It causes soil erosion
• It affects global warming
• It destroys native species
• It alters water routes and levels
• It destroys indigenous lifestyles
Each premise is a debatable issue in and of itself. Therefore, some measure of the supportive evidence behind each-at least enough to connect them as reasonably evidentiary links-must be given before they can be used to collectively support the author's main position. In these cases, arguments are typically arranged as follows:
• Introduction establishing the context of the argument as well as the author's position.
• Brief Preview outlining each premise, or reason, to be used as evidence supporting the claim.
• Body of Evidence presented, depending on audience analysis, in an order that will make the most sense to the audience.
• Conclusion summarizing the argument and demonstrating how each premise leads logically to the author's position, presents a call to action, or suggests further research.
When opposing arguments are particularly strong and readily accepted, discrediting them point-by-point may be the best strategy for convincing an audience to consider alternative points or support a different position.
• Introduction
• Rebut first opposing argument followed by first counter-argument
• Rebut next opposing arguments, followed by further counter-arguments as you go along
• Conclusion
This is a direct quote of a page at:
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/documents/arguedraft/deductive.cfm
The traditional academic argument is deductive, placing the author's position in the introduction and devoting the rest of the argument to presenting the evidence. Unless you are in a field where inductive reasoning is the norm, you can hardly go wrong with this method.
In some cases, all the evidence may be directed at proving the main point; in others, each piece may lead to a sub-point that needs proving before a convincing argument for the main point can be made. Depending on how directly each piece of evidence relates to the position, a deductive argument can be organized in a variety of ways.
* Introduction establishing the context of the argument as well as the author's position.
* Body of Evidence presented, depending on the audience analysis, from most to least, or least to most convincing.
* Conclusion summarizing the argument, presenting a call to action, or suggesting further research.
An argument supporting a ban on logging in rain forests might first need to establish and provide evidence regarding five other environmental premises, each supporting the author's position, regarding the effects of logging. For instance:
• It causes soil erosion
• It affects global warming
• It destroys native species
• It alters water routes and levels
• It destroys indigenous lifestyles
Each premise is a debatable issue in and of itself. Therefore, some measure of the supportive evidence behind each-at least enough to connect them as reasonably evidentiary links-must be given before they can be used to collectively support the author's main position. In these cases, arguments are typically arranged as follows:
• Introduction establishing the context of the argument as well as the author's position.
• Brief Preview outlining each premise, or reason, to be used as evidence supporting the claim.
• Body of Evidence presented, depending on audience analysis, in an order that will make the most sense to the audience.
• Conclusion summarizing the argument and demonstrating how each premise leads logically to the author's position, presents a call to action, or suggests further research.
When opposing arguments are particularly strong and readily accepted, discrediting them point-by-point may be the best strategy for convincing an audience to consider alternative points or support a different position.
• Introduction
• Rebut first opposing argument followed by first counter-argument
• Rebut next opposing arguments, followed by further counter-arguments as you go along
• Conclusion
This is a direct quote of a page at:
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/documents/arguedraft/deductive.cfm
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Styles of Argument/Rhetoric: Satire
First, your analysis paper is due on Tuesday 10/21 and is worth 100 points. Bring it to class, typed and ready to turn in.
Now, we turn our attention to the way people make arguments in our society (in and beyond the Academy).
We start with one of my favorites--satire and other creative modes for making one's point.
Read: Bachelder's "A Soldier Upon A Hard Campaign" From The Believer. Oct. 2004.
Read: "Bush Calls For Panic". From the The Onion, Oct. 15, 2008.
Read: Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" from the West Valley College website.
And Watch this and this.
Now, we turn our attention to the way people make arguments in our society (in and beyond the Academy).
We start with one of my favorites--satire and other creative modes for making one's point.
Read: Bachelder's "A Soldier Upon A Hard Campaign" From The Believer. Oct. 2004.
Read: "Bush Calls For Panic". From the The Onion, Oct. 15, 2008.
Read: Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" from the West Valley College website.
And Watch this and this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
