Contents:
Organizing with the classical system
Organizing with Toulmin’s elements of argument
Organizing with Rogerian or invitational argument
Once you have assembled good reasons and evidence in support of an argumentative thesis, you must organize your material to present the argument convincingly. Although there is no universally favored, one-size-fits-all organizational framework, you may find it useful to try one of the following patterns.
Organizing with the classical system
In the classical system of argument—followed by ancient Greek and Roman orators and still in widespread use today, some twenty-five hundred years later—the speaker begins with an introduction, which states the thesis and then gives background information. Next come the different lines of argument and then the consideration of alternative arguments. A conclusion both sums up the argument and makes a final appeal to the audience. You can adapt this format to arguments in many genres and media.
Organizing with Toulmin’s elements of argument
The simplified and systematic form of argument developed by Stephen Toulmin can help you organize an argumentative essay:
The federal government should ban smoking.
The ban would be limited to public places.
Smoking causes serious diseases in smokers.
Nonsmokers are endangered by secondhand smoke.
ASSUMPTION | The Constitution was established to “promote the general welfare.” |
ASSUMPTION | Citizens are entitled to protection from harmful actions by others. |
ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION | The federal government is supposed to serve the basic needs of the American people, including safeguarding their health. |
STATISTICS | Cite the incidence of deaths attributed to secondhand smoke. |
FACTS | Cite lawsuits won against large tobacco companies. |
FACTS | Cite bans on smoking already imposed in many municipalities and states. |
AUTHORITY | Cite the surgeon general. |
EMOTIONAL APPEAL | Show images or video of nonsmokers suffering from tobacco-related illnesses. |
COUNTER-ARGUMENTS | Smoking is legal. Smokers have rights, too. |
RESPONSE | The suggested ban applies only to public places; smokers would be free to smoke in private. A nonsmoker’s right not to have to inhale smoke in public places counts for more than a smoker’s right to smoke. |
Organizing with Rogerian or invitational argument
The psychologist Carl Rogers argued that people should not enter into disputes until they can thoroughly and fairly understand the other person’s (or persons’) perspectives. From Rogers’s theory, rhetoricians Richard Young, Alton Becker, and Kenneth Pike adapted a four-part structure that is now known as “Rogerian argument”:
Invitational rhetoric has as its goal getting people to work together effectively and to identify with each other; it aims for connection and collaboration. Such arguments call for structures that are closer to good two-way conversations or freewheeling dialogues than a linear march from thesis to conclusion. If you try developing such a conversational structure, you may find that it opens up a space in your argument for new perceptions and fresh ideas.