To make sure we’ll all up to speed, I thought we’d start off with a little refresher course on things you hopefully covered in high school: namely, thesis statements, topic sentences, organization, etc., then briefly talk about argumentative fallacies. This is stuff we’ll work on throughout the semester so please feel free to ask questions!
For the essay below, give it a once-over and try to identify the draft’s thesis, any problems with the draft’s focus and organization, ways it could be improved, etc.
Basic Training
The Army National Guard is a strict outfit designed to protect the United States. It is a high moral organization with a lot of discipline and honor. Whenever someone enlists in the Army, Army Reserve or Army National Guard, they go through eight weeks of vigorous training. This is called Basic Training or “Boot Camp”. While at Basic, the training starts at 4 a.m. and ends at 9 p.m. It is rough, both physically and mentally.
Recently, I went through that experience. Fort Dix is the biggest place I’ve ever been. Most of the recruits, including me, had not been away from home much, except for summer camp. Fort Dix is no summer camp. I felt lost in the crowd.
During my Basic at Fort Dix, I had the honor of being trained by one of the most dedicated men in the United States Army today. He was my drill Sergeant, Sergeant First Class Joe Martin S.F.C. Martin’s role in the Army is to use any means to prepare trainees to become soldiers. This is a difficult task. The training consists of physical conditioning, drill and ceremony, weapons qualification, first aid, combat maneuvers and reaction to chemical agents.
I felt that Sgt. Martin did an excellent job in training my platoon. His dedication and outstanding code of honor makes him an extremely honest and trustworthy person. Most of the day, the expression on his face reminds you of the “Old man of the mountain.” This serious face is a sign of concentration. At night when training was over, he would joke and laugh in a cynical fashion. But he never really cared about us.
One thing Sgt. Martin ingrained in us is that a soldier does not question his commanding officer. Some of the things we had to do in training seemed either foolish or brutal at the time. But if someone asked why we had to do them, Sgt. Martin just said he was the commanding officer and so long as he knew why we were doing it, it didn’t matter if we knew or not.
Sgt. Martin has been successful in his military career. He joined with a grade school education. In 16 years he went on to get his high school diploma, a college education, along with many medals and awards achieved through his outstanding duty. He was the right man to train us. Every man should have the experience of basic training.
Organization
How you organize the paragraphs of your paper has a huge effect on how your paper reads, i.e. how effective its presentation will be to the reader. While the first paragraph should give the thesis, subsequent paragraphs should help build the argument by providing examples and transitions in a smooth way, without jarring the reader. Also, each paragraph should begin with a topic sentence that basically details what the rest of that paragraph will talk about. Personally, one of the last things I do before turning in a paper is look at the order of my points, and see if they should be shifted around a bit. This is one of the easiest but most effective things you can do to fix up a paper.
Activity:
As practice, read the following short essay in which the paragraphs have been scrambled, and reorder them in a fashion that makes the most sense. Feel free to work in groups if you like. There are multiple solutions to this problem; just put the paragraphs in an order that seems logical.
Understanding Abusive Parents
1) The researchers have developed a system which allows them to record the effectiveness of parenting skills. They are particularly interested in disciplinary strategies because abuse most commonly occurs when the parent wants the child to comply. "It's a question of trying to determine which type of parent produces which type of child or which type of child elicits which type of parental behavior," explains Oldershaw.
2) A 'covert/hostile' mother shows no positive feelings towards her child. She makes blatant attacks on the child's self-worth and denies him affection or attention. For his part, the child tries to engage his mother's attention and win her approval.
3) As a result of their work, Walters and Oldershaw have identified distinct categories of abusive parents and their children. 'Harsh/intrusive' mothers are excessively harsh and constantly badger their child to behave. Despite the fact that these mothers humiliate and disapprove of their child, there are times when they hug, kiss or speak to them warmly. This type of mothering produces an aggressive, disobedient child.
4) An 'emotionally detached' mother has very little involvement with her child. She appears depressed and uninterested in the child's activities. The child of this type of mother displays no characteristics which set him apart from other children.
5) Researchers at the University of Toronto have taken important steps toward producing a profile of an abusive parent. Prof. Gary Walters and doctoral student Lynn Oldershaw of the Department of Psychology have developed a system to characterize parents who physically abuse their children. This could ultimately allow social service professionals to identify parents in child abuse.
6) In conclusion, the psychologists hope to provide information to therapists which will help tailor therapy to the individual needs of abusive parents. "Recidivism rates for abusive care-givers are high," says Walters. "To a large extent, abusive parents require a variety of treatment." Their research is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, who share the researchers’ hopes that this project can help social service professionals treat abusive parents as quickly and efficiently as possible, for the good of everyone involved.
7) Over the last five years, Walters and Oldershaw, in collaboration with Darlene Hall of the West End Creche, have examined over 100 mothers and their three to six-year-old children who have been physically abused. In the laboratory, the mother and child spend 30 minutes in structured activities such as playing, eating and cleaning-up. The family interaction is video-taped and later analyzed.
8) In order to put together a parenting profile, the two researchers examine the mother/child interaction and their perception and feelings. For instance, Walters and Oldershaw take into account the mother's sense of herself as a parent and her impression of her child. The researchers also try to determine the child's perception of himself or herself and of the parent. Abusive parents are often believed to have inadequate parenting skills and are referred to programs to improve these skills. These programs are particularly appropriate for parents who, themselves, were raised by abusive parents and as a result are ignorant of any other behavior toward her child.
Glossing
For anyone having trouble organizing their points, one of the best and easiest tricks you can use to tighten up your writing is a technique called glossing. Basically, glossing is just reading through a paragraph and noting in the margins a few words or phrases that relate to everything in that paragraph. Here’s an example:
While the American Civil War is commonly thought to be a conflict over the legality of slavery, there were other factors that contributed to the conflict. For example, the North and the South had substantially different economies and ways of life. Also, both sides had vastly different interpretations of government philosophy as put forth by Thomas Jefferson, with the North emphasizing Jefferson’s opinions on abolition while the South emphasized his opinions on states’ rights apart from the government as a whole. Especially in the matter of secession, Southerners believed they had the right to secede, while Northerners believed they did not. These vast differences of opinion came to a head when Abraham Lincoln—a Northerner and an abolitionist—was elected president.
If you were to gloss the paragraph above, how could you sum up all the information that’s there? You might simply write “Causes of the Civil War” off to the side, since every sentence related back to that in some way. Now, imagine if we revised the paragraph above with a couple extra points (in red), like this:
While the American Civil War is commonly thought to be a conflict over the legality of slavery, there were other factors that contributed to the conflict. For example, the North and the South had substantially different economies and ways of life. Also, both sides had vastly different interpretations of government philosophy as put forth by Thomas Jefferson, with the North emphasizing Jefferson’s opinions on abolition while the South emphasized his opinions on states’ rights apart from the government as a whole. Jefferson was himself a slave-owner, although he wrote often and eloquently about the immorality of slavery. Many scholars point out the hypocrisy of this. There are also indications that he had a long-standing affair with a slave named Sally Hemings, with whom he fathered several children. Especially in the matter of secession, Southerners believed they had the right to secede, while Northerners believed they did not. These vast differences of opinion came to a head when Abraham Lincoln—a Northerner and an abolitionist—was elected president.
Notice how the extra sentences on Jefferson seem out of place? While the information is interesting and might still be helpful to the essay, those sentences would be better off elsewhere—maybe in a paragraph about the hypocrisies of some abolitionists’ attitudes on slavery. When you gloss your own papers (or others’ papers during peer review), make a note if a sentence seems out of place. This is a very quick, very easy way to improve your writing!
Exercise: Read through the following sample paragraph and note what seems awkward or out of place. How would you fix it? Note: You might find more than one problematic area.
Gun violence in high schools and colleges around the country is often blamed on a long list of factors. Just some of these factors include: the ready availability of firearms, glamorous portrayals of violence in the media, the alleged apathy of the teenage generation, and the so-called decay of “traditional” family values. I remember when I learned of a school shooting at the University of Iowa, where I received my undergraduate degree. At first, I was worried that my favorite professors might have been injured or killed. Afterwards, I blamed the school for not responding to the killer’s depression in time. Of all the factors mentioned above, the media is most often blamed for gun violence. The media includes news, movies, radio, and television. I do not believe it is accurate to blame violence on the decay of “traditional” family values because our country’s history also includes such immoral actions as slavery, the genocide of Native Americans, segregation, child molestation within the clergy, and other travesties that are generally considered by this generation to be unthinkable. My great-aunt was also a life-long victim of spousal abuse, but until relatively recently, she suffered in silence because her plight was commonly viewed as a private matter between a husband and wife.
7 Common Mistakes in Essay Writing
(and how to fix them…)
Being the fantastic, caring professor that I am, I’ve compiled a list of the 7 most common mistakes I’ve noticed on papers from past courses I’ve taught. Feel free to use these when you’re writing your own college papers, or (if you want to make me really happy) implement them to improve your writing for the rest of your natural life.
1. Vague or unclear thesis. One of the hardest things in composing a successful paper can be figuring out how to summarize your entire argument in just one sentence. Oftentimes, what you think you want to argue at first isn’t actually the direction the paper ends up going. One tactic that can be helpful here is to write your thesis after you’ve written the rest of the paper, and you have a better feel for the paper as a whole. Then, simply weave the thesis into the beginning paragraph. By the way, don’t be afraid to make your theses edgy, but remember to be specific. For example, never just say that “Martin Luther King Jr. was a great leader” when you can say “Martin Luther King Jr. exemplified the spirit of the civil rights movement by uniting both blacks and whites in successful nonviolent protest”.
2. Excessively passive voice, or a tone that lacks confidence. Remember that in your papers, you’re trying to convince your reader of something, even though your reader may strongly disagree with you. Don’t exaggerate or be insincere, but don’t be timid either. Adopt a strong, active, confidence voice. For example: “Some people say that Moore uses some excessive tactics in his documentary that, in my opinion as in the opinion of others, might lessen his credibility.” Notice how vague and uncertain that sounds? Try this: “Clearly, Moore uses tactics that undercut the seriousness of these issues, and flaunts his desire to entertain at the cost of his credibility as a serious filmmaker.”
3. Presents an argument that is too one-sided. If you don’t do your homework, it shows. If you don’t consider the other side of an issue when you write your paper, your writing won’t be nearly as strong. Don’t be afraid to show the whole picture, even if part of it seems to go against your thesis. For example, if you’re writing a paper that criticizes Michael Moore, you’ll actually convince your reader that you’re more reasonable and intelligent if you can show the other side too: “Despite his penchant for exaggeration, Moore still touches on the sickness of apathy in our country, as propagated by the news media. The questions he poses about why we still harbor so much racism and ill will in this country are tough, and hard to answer.” If you feel like you’ve been too complimentary in a paper that’s seeking to be a criticism, you could follow up that paragraph with something like: “Nevertheless, Moore’s illustrations of media sensationalism and racism in this country are overshadowed by his willingness to exaggerate—even lie—to prove his point.”
4. Asks too many questions, instead of making statements. By wary of the question mark in your paper. While many issues cannot be answered simply, it sounds passive and uncertain when you ask lots of questions throughout your paragraphs, as a prelude to addressing an issue. In other words, if you’re going to write a paragraph about whether or not Janet Jackson was wrong for showing her nipple at the Super Bowl halftime show, try to avoid saying: “So should Jackson have considered who might be watching her performance before she did what she did? Yes. Are kids’ minds going to melt because they caught a brief glimpse of a natural part of the human body? No.” Note: The proceeding tactic could be effective if used very sparingly. As a rule of thumb, don’t use question marks more than once—maybe twice—in a longer paper.
5. Paragraphs are too jumbled, and the paper isn’t very well organized. Lack of organization makes your paper sound sloppy, and it will usually result in a low (even failing) grade. To avoid this, try writing outlines or cluster diagrams before you start the paper, so you have a template for what each paragraph should contain. If that’s not your style, at least gloss each paragraph when you’re done, to make sure all your information is in the right place.
6. Sentences are choppy with poor grammar and informal word choice. For this one, remember that (believe it or not) you’re smart, educated individuals with something to say. But if your paper sounds too casual, or your sentences sound sloppy and jump from topic to topic without a smooth transition, your reader will—quite frankly—think you’re stupid. They might also think that if you misuse punctuation, or misspell words. Don’t be afraid to read your paper out loud to make sure it “sounds right”, and really work to iron out the rough spots.
7. Citations are incorrect, quotes are improperly used, and a paper’s sources are uncredible in the first place. The internet makes it easy to do research, but it’s also tricky because anyone can say something on the interent; that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true. Don’t believe everything you read; as a rule, try to confirm every piece of information at least once via a credible news site before you place it in your paper. Also, never just toss in a quote without explaining its relevance. Even if someone else’s words perfectly sum up your feelings on an issue, you still have to indicate why you agree/disagree with that person. Also, be careful with citations. I’ve mentioned this about a dozen times, but when doing citations, the period goes after the parentheses. Within the parenthesis, you list the author’s name (unless you give it in the body of the sentence), and either the page number of a printed source, or the paragraph number of an online source. As with your Works Cited page, spend some time doing it right; teachers less generous than me might be unwilling to look past these mistakes, because they’ll think you were too lazy to correct them.
In conclusion….
“Learn the rules, and then forget them.” -Matsuo Basho (1644-1694).
The Rhetorical Triangle: Essentially, the Rhetorical Triangle is just shorthand for the rhetor (the speaker, the writer, the artist, etc.), the audience (the reader, the listener, the viewer), and the text (the essay, the poem, the story, the song, the movie, etc) being separate yet related things (also referred to sometimes as writer, audience, and genre in some textbooks).
That these three things are related is obvious; that they’re separate is something important that you may never have thought of before. In other words…
Once you write something and turn it in, once you say something, etc., it’s no longer under your control. Risk = that people won’t interpret it the way you intended.
To avoid this, you simply take your audience into consideration when you’re deciding on your word choice.
Three Basic Types of Audiences
1) Those who agree with you (shared ethos)
a. You don’t have to worry as much about coming across as offensive, or laying out your case, since you’re already “preaching to the choir”.
b. Don’t have to use as much logos (logical appeal) since they already agree with you; can use more pathos (appeals to emotions).
2) Those who disagree with you (opposing ethos)
a. VERY easy to come across as offensive if you’re not careful with your word choice.
b. If you come across as hostile, you have no chance of reaching any kind of compromise.
c. Should rely less on pathos, more on logos. Try to find a common ethical ground.
3) Those who are undecided
a. Can utilize appeals based on ethos, pathos, and logos.
b. You don’t have to be quite as careful as when you’re addressing an audience that disagrees, but you still have to be careful if you want to persuade them.
The primary challenge in good writing is establishing your credibility. Once you’ve done that, you can break the rules in moderation, so long as you realize you’re breaking the rules, and you’re doing it for a reason. In every paper, realize that you can be creative, funny, even outrageous—but you have to demonstrate first that you know the formal rules, you know what you’re talking about, and the reader had better take you seriously.
Being able to address audiences who may disagree with you is a vital and important skill to develop.
Situation 1: Imagine you hold a Pro-Choice position and you’re writing to a mostly Pro-Life audience. Your goal is not to offend them, but to convince them to meet you halfway on a particular issue (say, a piece of legislation on birth control). What are some phrases/words you would not use in your argument? In other words, what would be the wrong way to characterize the Pro-Life position in this case?
Situation 2: Same question, but reverse it. Now imagine you have a Pro-Life stance and you’re trying to convince a Pro-Choice person or group. What would be the wrong way to characterize that group?
In addition to showing respect for people of different viewpoints, it’s crucial that you avoid logical fallacies, or logical mistakes, in your arguments. In general, fallacies are arguments that often sound convincing, or at least very emotional, but actually don’t hold water. While different types of fallacies have different names (hasty generalization, either/or reasoning, bandwagon appeals, ad hominem, non sequitur, arguments from incredulity or ignorance, etc), it’s not really important to me that you remember the names. Instead, I just want you to get a feel for what is and isn’t a sound argument. For starters, read over the following statements and see if you can identify the problem in the person’s reasoning.
1) When our daughter got sick, we couldn’t afford to take her to the doctor. So we prayed for her to get well, and she did. Obviously, she was saved by prayer!
Rebuttal: What if she just had a cold? Just because B follows A, it doesn’t mean that A caused B.
2) My lazy neighbor is proof of how bad the welfare system is! He uses his food stamps to buy junk food and doesn’t take care of his kids. The whole program should be scrapped!
Rebuttal: People frequently try to draw conclusions based on just one or two bad examples—which doesn’t work. Also, the speaker in this case may not be aware that, on average, people on welfare have 1.7 jobs and 40% of them have two jobs!
3) Either you’re pro-choice on abortion or you don’t value the Constitution.
Rebuttal: Reducing complex situations to just two options is another tactic of a weak-minded rhetor. Can you imagine someone who is pro-life and values the Constitution? Of course!
4) Either you’re pro-life or you don’t think babies have the right to live.
Rebuttal: Again, can you imagine someone who is pro-choice and loves their children? Of course!
5) Either you support our military leaders or you have no respect for the sacrifice of our soldiers!
Rebuttal: Especially when one side doesn’t want you to point out their flaws, they try to trick you into staying quiet by implying that you’re unpatriotic, that you don’t value children or freedom, etc. Again, just ask yourself if you can imagine an exception to the rule.
6) All those scientists must be lying about Global Warming because if they weren’t, they’d trade in their cars for a horse and cart!
Rebuttal: ad hominem attacks are very common. They occur when one weak-minded, usually desperate rhetor doesn’t know how to counter another’s argument, so they just make fun of him/her/them instead. In this case, even if a particular scientist were a hypocrite, that doesn’t refute all their research and evidence.
7) I don’t think smoking crack is really all that bad. After all, lots of people do it!
Rebuttal: A lot of people doing something—or a famous person’s endorsement—doesn’t necessarily mean something is a good idea.
8) Officer, why are you arresting me? My roommate drives drunker than this all the time and gets away with it!
Rebuttal: This is similar to the argument that I shouldn’t punish a certain student for plagiarism or being disruptive in class, because someone else did it worse. As the old saying goes, two wrongs don’t make a right.
9) You can’t prove that God doesn’t exist, so God must exist.
Rebuttal: At one point, it was impossible to prove that matter was made up of atoms or that black holes existed. Just because you can’t prove something doesn’t make it false.
10) You can’t prove that God exists, so God must not exist.
Rebuttal: Same thing.
11) I can’t imagine that you could have aced that test without cheating. Therefore, you must have cheated.
Rebuttal: This is called an argument from incredulity. Again, just because someone can’t imagine something doesn’t make it false.
Try to figure out what’s wrong with these last four statements on your own.
12) Britney Spears has sold millions of records. I guess that means she’s the greatest singer who ever lived!
13) I don’t understand how human beings could have possibly landed on the moon, therefore the moon landing must have been filmed in a Hollywood studio.
14) Since you can’t explain every single piece of the Big Bang, Creationism must be true.
15) The Nazis were creative. Therefore, creative people are more likely to be Nazis.
Now, get in groups of 3-4 people and come up with a few bad arguments of your own.
No comments:
Post a Comment