A critical essay should discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the authors arguments
and evidence. Are the authors explanations convincing, are they complete, how are you
convinced, what evidence and economic reasoning is presented, is the evidence and economic
reasoning strong or weak? How is it strong or weak? And so on. Dont just state an opinion.
Dissect the authors presentation. Articulate your judgments, and support them with your own
reasoning, economic ideas, and use of the authors evidence. Explain why or how you arrived at
your conclusions. Develop and elaborate your view in detail. You are not expected to be an
expert in any field, but you are expected to be able to reason. Finally, you can also use your
economic understanding (verbal and/or graphical/mathematical) to add to and develop the
authors argument as a form of critical analysis.
For those having difficulty writing critical essays there are a few tricks that might help. It
is better to discuss a few related points in detail than to list many undeveloped ideas. Narrow
your discussion. Pick only the most important points and throw out minor ideas. If you are not
going to discuss it in detail, dont bring it up. If you can write a five-page essay based on one
paragraph or on one page in the assigned readings that is ok. Make your essay a coherent whole,
rather than a piece of shotgun writing. Trace through, step by step, the logic of the authors
argument. Are steps left out or is some kind of behavior not explained that is critical to the
authors story? Explain how and why. Are there other reasonable economic explanations that the
author did not rule out? Explain how these competing explanations work. What kinds of
evidence are used to support the argument? Does the evidence really support the authors
argument, or might the evidence fit some other (economic) explanation? Describe how it might
fit some other explanation. What missing evidence would the author need to make the argument
stronger? And so on….. Think of yourself as an economic lawyer. Either you must defend the
author and keep your client from the gallows, or you are the prosecuting lawyer, and you are
going to expose the authors careless economic crimes, explode the authors alibi, and separate
the trustworthy evidence from untrustworthy evidence. Most people find it easier to be the
prosecutor. Be creative in your application of economic thinking to the authors argument, but
dont violate economic reasoning in your thinking. For example, arguments that assert a change
in tastes or non-maximizing behavior are violations of economic methodologydont use
them. And remember, this is not a book report. Dont just summarize the reading. Finally, just
because the author is your professor does not mean you should not be critical. Arguments and
evidence exist separate from the individual. A kiss-ass essay will get you a zero.
