Use the following to help you analyze and evaluate how writers of position arguments use the genre’s basic features. The strategies position writers typically use to make a convincing case are illustrated below with examples from the readings in this chapter as well as sentence strategies you can experiment with later, as you write your own position argument.

A FOCUSED, WELL-PRESENTED ISSUE

Read first to see how the issue is presented and to determine whether it is clearly focused and well presented, given the writer’s purpose and original audience. To identify the issue, look at the title and the opening paragraphs. The title of Daniel J. Solove’s position argument (pp. 266–67), for example, identifies both the topic and his position:

For current, hotly debated issues, the title may be enough to identify the issue for readers, and writers may use their opening paragraphs merely to remind readers about what is at stake or what the position is that they oppose, using a simple sentence pattern like this:

For example, Solove uses this strategy in his position paper about privacy:

His “but I think...” response to the common view takes up the bulk of the essay.

When writers know the issue will be unfamiliar to their audience, they need to establish its significance, as student Jessica Statsky does in her position essay:

To establish the significance of the issue, Statsky quotes a respected authority and also cites statistics.

To present their positions effectively, writers must focus on a specific aspect of their issue, one they can address fully in the space allowed. An issue like the death penalty, for example, is too complex to be tackled fully in a relatively brief space. So writers must focus on one aspect of the issue. A writer taking a position on the death penalty might address the more specific question of whether race influences prosecutors to seek the death penalty, as does the student in the In College Courses scenario on page 242. Similarly, Richard Estrada addresses the complex issue of racial stereotyping by focusing on sports mascots (pp. 255–57).

Also consider how the writer frames the issue. Framing an issue is like cropping and resizing a photograph to focus the viewer’s eye on one part of the picture (see Figure 6.1). Writers typically frame the issue in a way that sets the stage for their argument and promotes their point of view, usually by suggesting that particular values are at stake or by raising in readers’ minds certain concerns. As you read, notice how each writer frames the issue, asking yourself questions like these:

A WELL-SUPPORTED POSITION

To argue effectively, writers need to assert an arguable position—that is, an opinion, not a fact that can be proved or disproved or a belief taken on faith—that can be supported with convincing reasons and trustworthy evidence. Read first to identify the position, usually declared in a thesis statement early in the essay. Then determine whether the position is clear and appropriately qualified (for example, using words like may and specifying conditions). Notice, for example, how Jessica Statsky states her thesis:

Then examine the main reasons and the evidence the writer provides, making sure that the reasons clearly support the writer’s position and that the evidence (such as statistics, research studies, or authorities) is credible. (Writers of position arguments often forecast the reasons they will develop; to see how Statsky does this, see the section that follows on organization.) Look for sentence strategies like these that introduce supporting reasons:

The following examples demonstrate some approaches to introducing supporting evidence:

Position arguments are most convincing when writers are able to appeal to readers on three levels:

When reading a position argument (or writing your own), consider how well the writer has used these appeals. Ask yourself questions like these: Is the argument logical and reasonable (logos)? Does the writer appear credible and trustworthy (pathos)? Are the values and feelings sincere or manipulative (ethos)?

AN EFFECTIVE RESPONSE TO OPPOSING VIEWS

An effective argument anticipates readers’ objections and opposing arguments and refutes or concedes them. Writers refute (argue against) opposing views when they can show that the opposing view is weak or flawed. A typical refutation states the problem with the opposing view and then explains why the view is problematic, using sentence strategies like these:

Notice that writers often introduce the refutation with a transition that indicates contrast, such as but,although,nevertheless, or however:

Writers may also concede (accept) valid objections, concerns, or reasons. A typical way of conceding is to use sentence strategies like these:

Here is an example from Jessica Statsky’s essay (pp. 250–55):

Conceding a strong opposing view reassures readers that the writer shares their values and builds a bridge of common concerns.

Frequently, though, writers reach out to readers by making a concession but then go on to point out where they differ. We call this the concession-refutation move. Writers making the concession-refutation move often employ sentence patterns like these, which include transitions that indicate contrast, like but, although, nevertheless, or however, to indicate that an exception or refinement is coming.

Here’s an example:

While reading position arguments, assess the effectiveness of the responses:

A CLEAR, LOGICAL ORGANIZATION

When reading a position argument, first look for a thesis statement that directly asserts the writer’s position. For example, Amitai Etzioni begins with an alarming sentence that states in a surprising way what he goes on to clarify in the next sentence:

In addition to asserting the thesis, writers sometimes preview the reasons in the same order they will bring them up later in the essay, as in this example of a forecasting statement by Jessica Statsky:

Notice also where the writer uses logical transitions: to indicate supporting evidence (because), exceptions (however), concessions (admittedly), refutations (on the other hand), or conclusions (therefore) as well as to list reasons (first, finally). Transitions may be useful in a forecasting statement, as in the preceding example, or in the topic sentence of a paragraph or group of paragraphs, as in the following examples from Solove’s position argument:

Finally, check for logical fallacies—such as oversimplifying, personal attack (ad hominem), slanting, and false analogy.