Argumentative Essay

QuickStudy Digital Reference Guide to Planning, Researching, and Writing

Kathryn Jacobs

• Éditeur: QuickStudy Reference Guides
• Année: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781423243229
• Sujet: Langues et linguistique
• Sous-sujet: Écriture créative

Extremely important essay form that lays the groundwork for persuading others to see your side. Students will be asked to write this essay type (also known as a persuasive essay) from grade school through college, and definitely on standardized tests. Beyond school, much of a career can be spent debating points to persuade your peers, coworkers, colleagues, customers, vendors, constituents, etc. Which is why the skill is important enough to be tested nationwide. Great for school, this digital guide can last to support the process of persuasion for a lifetime.
Digital guide includes:

• Understanding Argument & the Writing process
  • Logic in Argument
  • Six Evidences of a Good Argument
  • Types of Arguments
  • What an Argument Requires
  • Arguable Issues
  • Reading Argumentative Materials
  • Writing Your Own Argument
  • Critical Thinking Prompts
  • Purpose & Parts of an Argument
  • Types of Claims
  • Types of Evidence
  • Types of Fallacies
  • Questions for Reading/Writing an Argument
• Writing the Argumentative Essay
  • Understanding the Audience
  • Research
  • Model Essay Outline
  • Sample Essay

UNDERSTANDING ARGUMENT & THE WRITING PROCESS

What Is an Argumentative Essay?

Product of an investigation:

• Prior to writing, the investigator collects, generates, and evaluates evidence.
• The investigator comes to a tentative conclusion based on the evidence.
• An argumentative essay thus begins at the end of the process, after the investigation and evaluation are complete. The writer:
  • States his or her position.
  • Marshals the evidence collected. Here it is proper to:
    • Identify and explain common misunderstandings, particularly those readers are likely to hold.
    • Acknowledge any facts that seems to contradict your conclusion and explain how they fit in.
    • Demonstrate how the evidence (properly understood) leads to the conclusion.

Purpose: Attempts to convince an audience to:

• Agree with facts.
• Share values.
• Accept arguments and conclusions.
• Undermine prejudices and preconceptions.
• Adopt a way of thinking.

Arguments are generally built around a specific statement (a claim or thesis). When writing or evaluating such claims, be sure to ask yourself:

• Is the claim debatable within the field of study?
• Is the claim susceptible of proof? If so,
  • What sort of evidence could support the claim?
  • What sort of evidence (if any) has been omitted, and why?

Most arguments contain debatable statements (e.g., arguments, assertions, propositions, and premises). Other people may or may not agree with these statements.

EX: Damage to the ozone layer is probably irreversible.

Most arguments contain non-debatable statements (also known as facts). These are statements that no reasonable person would challenge.

EX: Inflation is not good for the economy.

Logic in Argument

• Logic is a way of reasoning devised to establish what can or cannot be proved true.
• Logic offers basic rules for coming to correct conclusions in an argument.
• Logic offers correctives to faulty thinking.
• Classical logic: The three basic laws of reason
  • Law of Identity (LI): All things possess their own unique features. This is true of both universal and individual objects and is expressed mathematically as A = A. Each object is thus identical to itself.
  • Law of Non-Contradiction (LNC): Contradictory statements cannot both be true at the same time and in the same manner. Thus “A is B” and “A is not B” are contradictions.
  • Law of Excluded Middle (LEM): For any claim, either that claim or its opposite must be true; “Either A or not-A.” If something is true, it must exclude something (namely falsity).

Syllogistic Logic

• Deductive logic (top-down logic)
  • General to particular: A deductive argument claims that it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if the premises are true. EX: All cherries are fruits. A Utah Gold is a cherry, therefore a Utah Gold is a fruit.
  • Cause to effect: Here a general cause leads to a particular effect. EX: Jerry is allergic to nuts. Jerry ate a chocolate bar with nuts in it and became sick. He was allergic to the nuts in the bar.
  • Necessary conclusions: In a well-constructed deductive argument, the conclusion follows necessarily (inevitably) from the general. Note: Not all true statements lead to necessary conclusions.
    • Alternate effect: Alcohol need not always cause drunkenness; the conclusion is not necessary.
    • Alternate causes: When drunkenness occurs, it is always caused by alcohol, by definition. There is no alternate cause, so the conclusion is necessary.
  • Arguments by Cause: Whether making or assessing an argument by cause, ask yourself:
    • How certain is the relationship between the cause and the effect?
    • Is the relationship overly simplistic or too complex?
    • Are there other effects or causes?
  • Advantages and disadvantages of deductive logic:
    • Deductive arguments involve a high degree of certainty; valid deductive arguments are absolutely true.
    • The main disadvantage of a deductive argument is its limited, circular nature: no new information is acquired.
• Inductive logic (bottom-up logic)
  • Particular to general: Inductive arguments proceed from the particular to the general. Because human experience is limited, however, even the best inductive arguments are only probable.
  • Deductive arguments are either valid or invalid; there is no middle ground. Inductive arguments may be strong, weak, or in-between, depending on the relevance and number of particulars that lead to the general conclusion.
  • Effect to cause: A particular observation leads to a general cause: EX: Deaths by alcohol poisoning are up by over 20%, so alcohol consumption is probably rising. Note: While the argument is probable, it is not necessary; society may simply be keeping better track of alcohol poisoning deaths.
  • “Scientific” reasoning: Science proceeds from observation to hypothesis, and then looks for proof. As such, it is inherently inductive. For this reason, scientific discoveries must be “reproducible” to win general conviction.
  • Probable conclusions: Inductive arguments may be highly probable, but they are not absolutely verifiable. EX: Cows come in a variety of colors, but no example of a purple cow has ever been forthcoming. Therefore, there are no purple cows. Note: The evidence is sufficient to show that purple cows must be highly unusual—but it would only take one example to disprove the statement.
  • Advantages and disadvantages of inductive logic:
    • Inductive logic is much more likely to produce new ideas.
    • Inductive arguments cannot be proved absolutely.
• Types of syllogisms that form arguments and their fallacies:

Modus Ponens (MP)	Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent
If P, then Q	If P, ...