How to respectively argue with paper

The word argument has a negative connotation tied to it.  You picture red-faced, rage-filled individuals blindly yelling at each other.  This is not the case with arguing in academic writing.

First and foremost, a good argument is a conversation (which I described in an earlier blog post).  The claim of the argument (thesis) should be something debatable (it may be beneficial to start with a question and form an argument from there); the whole idea of the argument is to inform and persuade your audience.  If you’re swimming in information, your topic is too broad; if you’re struggling to find enough evidence your topic could be too narrow.   Next, you need to have logical reasons for your claim and support those reasons with relevant evidence (warrant).  Keep in mind the questions readers might have regarding what you’re saying; anticipation is key to a good argument.  The next stage in the writing process deals with addressing the counterarguments and responding to them.  You have to give readers both sides in order for your argument to seem clear, fair, and credible.  To end the paper/argument, sum up what you’re trying to say, and, hopefully you’ve given your audience enough information and proved/solved your claim.

As we learn more about academic writing, I see that we are trying to move away from the “standard”, the five-paragraph, the “no personality” paper.  Some approaches have more or less stayed the same, for example, the idea of appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos to strengthen arguments.  Although its defiantly been enhanced, the fundamental ideas of these appeals and their importance in your argument has aligned with what I learned in high school.

Although I’ve heard this word before, the word “claim” has come to take a new meaning in regards to academic writing.  Usually, we say that other people “claim” ideas, it provides a sense of doubt, like although the say this, it can be disputed.  Now, I am the one with the claim and I have to prove it.  The one word that confuses me a bit is warrant.  It’s a new one, but I think I’m getting the hang of it.  From what I understand, warrant is the relevancy of your reasons and evidence.

Until next time…its Rachel signing off.