Major Essay #1: Mapped Argument
Write an argumentative essay using the four-part thesis template we’ve used for responses:
A (main topic), A1 (established position), B (problems with established position), A2 (your position).
The argument should make an illuminating and insightful contribution to your audience’s understanding of any topic or question we’ve read about or discussed so far this semester.
Your paper needs to have a clear logical structure. It should contain at least 9 separate premise-level claims and to make clear how the premises logically combine with each other to add up to your overall thesis. To demonstrate that this is the case, you need to include an argument map of your own argument along with the paper when you submit it.
The map is an important part of the full assignment, with much of the grade depending on it, and your paper and your map need to match up. Make sure that both your argument and your map are logically valid, as well as doing your best to establish that both are sound.
The map is a map of your underlying logical structure – how the conclusion is entailed by a set of premises, how those each rest on sub-premises, etc. Your writing doesn’t have to follow the same order as your premise-map, but each premise in the map should be established somewhere in the writing. You can use the map to help you identify points you need to make more explicitly, and you can use your writing to help clarify how to phrase the points in the map …
Since this is your first full paper, think about how to expand it from the thesis
templates we’ve been discussing. One basic suggestion for structure might be:
Paragraph 1 – explain the main topic (A) and mention where in the semester’s readings or discussions it comes from, why it’s important, and who your interlocutors are. Give a brief explanation of the interlocutors’ reasons (A1), mention a few problems or missing elements in their reasoning (B), then end with a summary of your position (A2).
Main paragraphs – Each main paragraph should be a full explanation of how one of your reasons contributes to warranting your thesis over your interlocutor’s. Explain the reason, show what interlocutor-reason it weighs against, explain why yours is stronger, and explain how it warrants your conclusion. Repeat for as many paragraphs as you have reasons.
Final paragraph – Give a clear summary restatement of your conclusion and why it is warranted. Then explain the further future consequences of this argument, as per section C of our normal thesis template. This will mean that your argument ends with some further insight for your reader to go off and think about.
A reasonable length for this paper would be around 750-900 words long. You’ll get to revise it after my first round of comments, with your final grade being an average of the initial grade and the revised grade.
AUDIENCE
All papers for this course ought to be written with a specific kind of reader: imagine a hard-working member of our class, someone who has read all the readings, but who is not a deep thinker.
In other words, your final argument should be original and insightful to someone who has read every assigned reading and can recall with perfect accuracy every discussion we have had in class, but who hasn’t thought about anything the readings leave unexplicit.
The consequences of this are twofold:
(1) You can assume that your audience knows who the authors are and what they say. As such, avoid spending too much time on summary!
(2) Your arguments must be capable of bringing new knowledge to such an audience.
Make an argument of your own that goes beyond the author’s position.
B: According to you, what is a problem with the author’s position or some new reasoning the author hasn’t considered?
(Your reasoning should be distinct from the author’s reasoning.)
A2: What is your own position on the main question or topic?
(Your position should logically follow from the problems/new reasoning you identify in B.)
C: Lastly, what are the consequences of your position? (e.g., How does it affect our other beliefs and behaviors? What should we do if it is true?, etc.)
The whole thing goes beyond the original reading and provides an interesting insight.
