ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING is
a common type of
assignment in school, though few students handle it well. Why? Because they often pick a topic they have not thought much
about, and without enough material to argue their way through,
they end up restating the same
point over and over. The essay
becomes one long repetition.
If you have more than one essay option, choose a topic you are familiar with. However, you don’t always have that option, especially in an essay exam. This is why you need to read extensively and keep up with current events: The more you understand the world, the more topics you can write about.
We cannot help you come up with arguments—that’s your job. But we can help you understand how to organize your essay a little better.
To argue effectively, you need to
- State clearly what the issue is.
- State your position in the thesis statement.
- Support your position with sound arguments supported by details or examples.
- Anticipate and respond to your readers’ objections or concerns.
- Conclude cogently.
For example:
Should Tara Win?
(Define the issue: ) Many who watched the figure skating events at the 1998 Winter Olympics insist that Michelle Kwan, not Tara Lipinski, should have won the ladies' competition. Both Michelle and Tara landed seven triple jumps in the long program. Tara, though the more proficient jumper of the two, lacked sophistication in her skating, so many believe Michelle's clean and artistically exquisite program was just as worthy, if not more so, of an Olympic gold medal. (State your position: ) But I think that on the night of the competition, Tara deserved to win.
(Support your position with sound arguments: )
In any figure skating competition, winning means giving one's very best in both the short and the free program. Michelle was the odds-on favorite for the ladies' gold, especially after edging Tara out for first place in the short program. Judges stepped into the White Wing arena on February 16 with very high expectations for Michelle. But Michelle’s Olympic long program lacked the crispness she once displayed at the Nationals. She demonstrated superior technique and nailed all her elements; but to avoid mistakes, she skated a little too cautiously and slowly. In the eyes of experienced judges, Michelle’s performance was a slight letdown. Tara, whom every onlooker expected to wait for her golden moment in 2002, who had been upstaged by Michelle throughout the season, and who had received negative media reviews the preceding three months, skated later, and gave it her all. Her great speed, her energy, and her two triple-triple combinations, wowed the judges into ranking her performance ahead of Michelle's. By trying her best, she captured the Olympic spirit and the gold.
Not only was Michelle's performance not her best of the season, but her long program, “Lyra Angelica”, also lacked the ingredients of a winning program. Before 1998, Michelle’s programs were considered to be among the most sophisticated, filled with connecting elements between her jumps and spins. But “Lyra Angelica” consisted of nothing but stroking from element to element. More critically, “Lyra” did not include any footwork sequence, a crucial element in any well-rounded program– a strategic error, considering that footwork is Michelle’s strength. Though Tara's program was not as elegant, her program did include some semblance of footwork after her combination spin, and compared favorably to a stripped-down “Lyra” in all technical elements.
(To accommodate readers with different views, include a counter-argument and refute it: )
A lot of folks who joined in the debate ended up being split between Michelle's artistry and Tara's athleticism. Michelle’s artistry should have won the day, experts say. (counter-argument: ) However, let’s remind ourselves that this is, after all, a sport. Artistry was nowhere in the judging criteria; presentation was – and that was used to reward technical prowess displayed effortlessly. Six out of nine judges believed Tara presented the program well enough to win. The majority won. (Conclusion. Restate your position, and if possible, add a new and arresting perspective: )
I, who was born in Hong Kong, would love to see a Chinese face on top of the podium. (Conclusion restated with a new perspective) But let us not get into the debate of who is a better skater, or what it was the skaters did that made them the greatest. Even though your favorite skater will remain the greatest in your eyes, Tara was the best competitor the night she won.
A few more things to note about argumentative writing:
- You can state your position after you weigh the pros and cons. However, many beginners find it easier to state it in the opening paragraph.
- You can cite various forms of evidence to support your argument, including anecdotes, statistics and testimonies from authorities (Axelrod, 232).
- To come up with good arguments for your essay, you need to think critically. We cannot help you there—this can be a whole college course in itself. However, I’ve provided some websites at the end of this post that may help.
- Avoid strong language that may put off readers with opposing views. Statements like these will keep readers from reading your essays:
- “Xyz is immoral and unethical. You should not do it.”
- “Anyone who knows anything about skating would put Tara ahead of Michelle.”
- “Premarital sex is unnecessary, immoral, and unhealthy. We need to defeat lust.”
These websites have more information on argumentative writing:
Logic in Argumentative Writing
Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument
Argumentative Essay
Bibliography
Axelrod, Rise B. and Charles R. Cooper, The St. Martin's Guide to Writing. New York : St. Martin’s Pres, 1994.
For an example of a "definition essay": Re: Julelai and Mountainhiker this is my second draft
Other writing guides: Thinking Originally and Writing Well