1. Humanities-oriented academic essays are typically both analytical and argumentative.

Transcription

1 Analysis & Argument 1. Humanities-riented academic essays are typically bth analytical and argumentative. As yu may recall, the pint f an academic paper is nt s much t tell me a bunch f static facts r ideas as it is t analyze them: t make sense f them, tell me their meanings, their significance. We usually d this by articulating the relatinships between the subject and ther things, ideas, events, peple, etc. (similarity, difference, causatin, influence, qualificatin, affiliatin, additin, deletin, increase, decrease, etc.) because it is nly within such relatinal cntexts that things achieve their wn particular meanings. Once yu figure ut this analysis, yu can rganize it int a persuasive argument arund which yu structure yur entire essay. Therefre, the main wrk f yur essay will usually be t argue fr a particular relatinship r prcess invlving all the significant factrs f yur argument. 2. Figuring ut yur argument begins with frmulating a Gd Academic Questin early in yur research. It shuld be significant: a questin that thers will care abut, and nt bvius, trite r trivial It shuld be fair and bjective; there shuld be mre than ne pssible answer. (In ther wrds, dn t write yur questin in such a way as t pre-determine the answer.) It shuld be analytical: Instead f asking the merely descriptive questins wh, what, when & where? analysis asks hw? and why questins and any ther questins that lead me deeper int issues f meaning and value. Fr example: Why has Eurpe mved clser t unificatin since Wrld War Tw? Hw d Western assumptins abut the relatinship between bdy and mind influence the practice f medicine? Why can s many pst-clnial natins be cnsidered failed states many decades after independence? What was the relatinship between thelgy and scial cntext in the early Methdist mvement? Even when yu dn t yet knw yur argument, this questin can help yu narrw the fcus f yur research, thught and writing.

2 3. The answer yu eventually devise t this questin usually after further research, thinking, writing and inventin -- is yur argument. If yur argument is clear, yu will be able t summarize it in a ne- r tw-sentence thesis statement, which eventually will g in yur intrductin. It is helpful if yu knw this thesis at the beginning f yur middle (Arrangement) stage f writing, but yu may nt fully figure it ut until the end f that stage. Typically, this thesis will describe a relatinship (similarity, difference, causatin, influence, qualificatin, affiliatin, additin, deletin, increase, decrease, etc.) between the majr terms (the A, B, C & D etc.) f yur analysis. In ther wrds, smething like: Because A is f B nature, then C. If A causes B, then B is f C nature. B des nt cause C, but A influences bth B and C, etc. Each f these terms represents a majr sectin f yur argument and f yur paper. FOR EXAMPLE: Relatinship Term A) Increased ethnic tensins PLUS B) Lack f lcal infrastructure DESPITE C) Influx f freign aid CAUSES D) The instability f the pst-clnial natin-state A) Bhrs apprach t physics DIFFERED B) Frm that f Einstein; This difference is nt nly REFLECTED C) In the language each uses; it is CONSTRUCTED D) By that language.

3 I ll Warrant! LOGICAL ARGUMENTATION FOR GLS WRITERS A lgical argument exists whenever tw elements are present: 1) a CLAIM r ASSERTION that smething is true EXAMPLE: Mst Americans need t exercise mre. 2) SUPPORT r EVIDENCE that ffers prf r authrity fr the claim. EXAMPLE: Accrding t the latest gvernment figures, mst Americans are verweight. CLAIM A claim is an assertin that smething is true. Nt a statement f fact, but a cnclusin, thesis, prpsitin, main pint. Ask yurself, What am I trying t prve? What d I want t cnvince my readers f? The truth f a gd claim can be disputed; by its nature, it assumes the pssibility f at least tw different pints f view Five Categries f Claims: Claims f FACT: The Cnstitutin restricts ur right t bear arms. Glbal warming is ccurring. Wmen are just as effective as men in cmbat. Affirmative actin undermines individual achievement. Immigrants are taking away jbs frm Americans wh need wrk. Claims f DEFINITION: Handgun laws d nt cnstitute an infringement n ur right t bear arms. Alchlism is a disease, nt a vice. We need t define the term family befre we can talk abut family values. Date rape is a vilent crime. The death penalty cnstitutes "cruel and unusual punishment." Claims f CAUSE: Tugher gun laws wuld decrease the number f hmicides. The intrductin f the cmputer int university writing classes has enhanced student writing ability. The ppularity f the Internet has led t a rise in plagiarism amngst students. The ecnmic bm f the 1990s was due in large part t the skillful leadership f the executive branch. Claims f VALUE: The right t bear arms is an imprtant right in the U.S. Dctr-assisted suicide is immral. Vilent cmputer games are detrimental t children s scial develpment. The Simpsns is nt a bad shw fr yung peple t watch. Dancing is gd, clean fun. Claims f POLICY: The sale f assault weapns shuld be banned in the U.S. We shuld spend less n the prisn systems and mre n early interventin prgrams. Welfare prgrams shuld nt be dismantled. The state ught t issue vuchers fr parents t use t fund their children s educatin. Every persn in the United States shuld have access t federally-funded health insurance. Adapted frm Nancy Wd s Perspectives n Argument, 2nd ed. (pp )

4 SUPPORT Supprt (aka grunds r prf) is represented by anything that supprts yur claim, including statistics, data, facts, qutatins, paraphrase, summary, examples, discussin. Ask yurself, What infrmatin will cnvince my readers f my claim? Supprt can take ne f tw frms: hard EVIDENCE; r expert OPINION. WARRANT Every argument, hwever, als includes a third, essential (but ften unstated) element: 3) the lgical relatinship between claim and supprt knwn as a WARRANT. CLAIM: Mst Americans need t exercise mre. SUPPORT Accrding t the latest gvernment figures, mst Americans are verweight. WARRANT: Exercise can enable weight lss. The warrant is the lgic f yur argument. It functins as a srt f bridge between yur claim and yur supprt. This schema might be represented graphically in the fllwing manner: WARRANT CLAIM SUPPORT Claim: Supprt: Warrant: Needle exchange prgrams shuld be ablished (because) They nly cause mre peple t use drugs. WHEN YOU MAKE RISKY BEHAVIOR SAFER, YOU ENCOURAGE MORE PEOPLE TO ENGAGE IN IT. Claim: Supprt: Warrant: The Simpsns shuld nt be studied at Duke (because) It is nly a cartn. CARTOONS ARE NOT AN APPROPRIATE SUBJECT FOR ACADEMIC INQUIRY.

5 A warrant is the lgical cnnectin, the bridge between yur claim and supprt. It can als be thught f as the assumptin (presuppsitin, premise, principle) upn which yur argument depends. If smene wants t challenge a claim yu are making, she will questin either yur supprt r yur warrant. Nte: warrants are based in the frmal syllgistic reasning (see ur handut n syllgisms and enthemymes) sme f yu may have learned in high schl debate class: the warrant = the majr premise f the syllgism (a categrical rule) the supprt = the minr premise (a specific instance r case) the claim = the lgical cnclusin derived frm these tw premises Ntice hw lgical argumentatin is ften a matter f cnnecting the abstract and general (the warrant r rule) with the cncrete and specific (the supprt r case). QUALIFICATIONS All arguments, then, feature this tri f claim-supprt-warrant. Hwever, mst academic arguments als feature anther, ptinal element: 4) QUALIFICATIONS that acknwledge the limits f yur argument. CLAIM: Mst Americans need t exercise mre. SUPPORT Accrding t the latest gvernment figures, mst Americans are verweight. WARRANT: Exercise can enable weight lss. Further Qualificatin: Hwever, strenuus exercise is nt apprpriate fr thse with certain health cnditins. A qualificatin is a limitatin n the scpe r precisin f yur claim, ften expressing degrees f cnfidence r prbability. Academic argument is typically abut prbability and pssibility, nt certainty, and therefre uses a lt f qualifiers such as many, sme, few, pssibly. Why wuld yu want t qualify yur argument? Usually as a way f anticipating ptential bjectins r innculating readers against cunter-arguments. While Jnes is right abut the decimatin f Native Americans by Eurpeans in 17 th century Virginia, [cncessin] she is mst likely wrng in ascribing t them a careful campaign f germ warfare against the native ppulatins, because she des nt fully take int accunt the fact that the same patterns f disease transmissin which we nw can analyze s exhaustively wuld have likely appeared randm and unpredictable at the time, evidence mre f Gd s judgement than man s activities. [rebutta] [limitatin f certainty]l If we assume als that the reductin in native ppulatins was caused at least as much by disease transmissin amng trading partners as it was by pen warfare, [limiting cnditins] then we cannt cnfidently say that white Virginians used disease as a weapn during this perid. [limitatin f scpe]