 Thesis
 Body
 Counterargument
 Organizing
 Checklist
Index
Thesis
Body/CSW
Counter
Organizing
Checklist

—Joan Didion journalist

 Take a stand.
 Make your case:
• present evidence

• support it with CSW
( C laim — S upport — W arrant)
Acknowledge your opponent’s view and counterargue.
Overview

 A thesis is a statement that others may agree or disagree with.
Take a Stand

Fact (not arguable):
Hybrid cars use less gasoline than traditional cars.
Take a Stand


Fact (not arguable):
Hybrid cars use less gasoline than traditional cars.
 Thesis (arguable):
The federal government should encourage the development of alternative fuels.
Take a Stand



Possible thesis
This paper will describe a V-chip and examine the uses of the V-chip in
American-made television sets.
Your reaction?
Why should I read this?
Take a Stand


Parents, often too busy to watch television with their families, can use the V-chip to monitor their children’s viewing habits.
And this matters because….?
Take a Stand

 The most important feature of the family television is not the big screen or the remote control: it is the
V-chip, which helps parents monitor what their children watch.
So that’s what you’re trying to prove…and it matters because it protects children.
Take a Stand

Claim
Support
Warrant
Index
Thesis
Body/CSW
Counter
Organizing
Checklist



—point you’re trying to prove
What point is the paper trying to make?
What belief or opinion is the author defending?
Support


SUPPORT —evidence for the claim
Why should readers believe the claim?
 What proof is given?
Support

•
•
WARRANT —explains how/why the evidence proves the point
How are the claim and the evidence related?
What does this evidence prove?
Support

Claim —McDonald’s built a fast-food empire by delivering the same experience in every store, whether it’s in Albuquerque or Akron.
Support —Each job is broken down into routines. For example, diagrams show exactly where to place each pickle on a burger.
Warrant —This routinization ensures that didn’t have a pickle in every bite!
at all McDonald’s franchises.



Your readers will also be thinking of objections.
Good writers anticipate and answer readers’ objections.

Counterarguments are one way to meet objections.
Warrant —This routinization ensures that hamburgers are built and served the same way at all McDonald’s franchises.
Not in my experience!

Evidence doesn’t speak for itself.
Support

The same fact may be given two different interpretations:
McDonald’s jobs are broken down into standardized routines.
Jim: Boring!!!!
Dwight: Clear path to advancement
Support

For the last fifteen years, television and radio advertising has become so overblown, so in-your-face, and so LOUD, that my senses have revolted.
That’s why I like the TiVo box my father has —I can watch and record my favorite shows and zap through the commercials.
Heaven.
—Brian Evankovich
Magic City Morning Star
Support

. Turner Broadcasting CEO Jaime Kellner
. . . said it best: “Your contract with the network when you get the show is you’re going to watch the spots. Any time you skip a commercial, you’re actually stealing the programming.”
—Brian Evankovich
Magic City Morning Star
Support

TiVO allows viewers to skip commercials .
Consumer: Heaven!!!!
TV exec: I’ll sue!
Support

A Pennsylvania school district banned
''unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct which offends, denigrates or belittles an individual.''
Support

A Pennsylvania school district banned
''unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct which offends, denigrates or belittles an individual.’
PROS? CONS?
Support

“
Hate speech codes can prohibit the expression of hate speech but they can not change the attitudes that lead to that expression. The effect is to send hate underground where it is less likely to be challenged
”
(Smethers, 1993, p 19).
“
In every case where hate speech codes have been challenged, the courts have criticized the text of the codes for being vague and overbroad.
Hate speech codes have been found consistently unconstitutional by the courts
”
(Black, 1994, p. 13).
Support

Claim: A hate speech code should not be adopted because it would not reduce hate.
Huh?
Support: Smether (1993) argues that stopping people from saying hateful things does nothing to change hateful attitudes.
Warrant: Paradoxically, hate speech
Which means…?
codes can actually strengthen prejudice by driving it underground where it escapes challenge
.
Support

C
S
W
A hate speech code should not be adopted at
MU because it will be struck down by the court system. “In every case where hate speech codes have been challenged, the courts have criticized the text of the codes for being vague and overbroad. Hate speech codes have been found consistently unconstitutional by the courts”
(Black, 1994, p. 13). Adopting a hate speech code that will be thrown out of court is a waste of time and money.
Support

Claim:
 Supporting Material: The music industry slapped
[Princeton student Daniel Peng] with a lawsuit seeking potentially billions of dollars in damages for distributing copyrighted works. His site was shut down and his life thrown into chaos.
 Warrant:

Claim: Commercials are the best/worst entertainment on TV.
 Supporting Material:
 Warrant:
Support

 Establish common ground.
 Show awareness of both sides.
 Acknowledge and counter the strongest objection to your arguments.
Index
Thesis
Body/CSW
Counter
Organizing
Checklist

 Why establish common ground?
C ounter

Why establish common ground?



Enhance credibility
Make it easier for readers to listen by acknowledging their point of view
Remind readers that they share values with the writer
C ounter

Son: I don’t need a helmet when skateboarding.
PU: OK, if you write a paper proving it’s safe.
Evidence favors the Parental Unit:



50,000 skateboarders visit ER each year
1,500 have serious, even fatal head injuries
Most seriously injured weren’t wearing helmets
C ounter

 Glenn Reynolds argues that a heavily armed citizenry benefits society.
 This claim rests on very fragile evidence , as Prof. Philip J. Cook…and I demonstrated in a 2003 study.
—Jens Ludwig professor of public policy, Georgetown University, in Letter to the Editor, NY Times
Counter



Glenn Reynolds argues that a heavily armed citizenry benefits society.
The evidence [he] cites is selective ….
[He] doesn’t mention the only well-controlled study linking firearm prevalence to burglary, which found that counties with higher rates of household gun ownership have higher, not lower, burglary rates.
—Matthew Miller deputy director, Harvard Injury Control Research Center
Counter



Prove that opponents’ logic is faulty
Show that their evidence doesn’t really prove the claim
 Attack the warrant
C ounter

 It has been argued that children who attend daycare at an early age miss out on important early learning that occurs in parent-child interactions. In reality….
Counter



Many people believe …The truth is…
Some maintain that … The evidence does not support this claim….
Counter

“Dr. Evans, who claimed to be a ‘Fellow of the American College of Emergency
Physicians’ and a member of the AMA, has not been a Fellow of ACEP since
1984. His last year of membership in AMA was in 1990 —10 years before his testimony .”
Counter

 A 2002 study in the American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition found that chocolate had health benefits, like antioxidants and flavinoids.
 The study had only 23 subjects.
 Funding came from the American Cocoa
Research Institute.
Counter




Fruits are a better source of antioxidants.
“Unfortunately for chocolate lovers, chocolate’s high content of stearic acid puts it in the same category of risk of coronary disease as milk and butter.”
“Chocolate is a terrific food, but it isn’t a health food.”
—Dr. Jay Cohen
Counter

 A 1980 study by A. V. Harrell and P. W.
Wirtz found that, among those students who worked at least 25 hours per week while in school, their unemployment rate four years later was half that of those who did not work.
Counter

 A 1980 study by A. V. Harrell and P. W. Wirtz found that, among those students who worked at least 25 hours per week while in school, their unemployment rate four years later was half that of those who did not work. This is an impressive statistic.
It must be seen, though, together with the finding that many . . . drop out and are gobbled up in the world of lowskill jobs.
(see St. Martin’s Guide, p. 360, ¶ 10)
Counter

 Ernest Evans (2005) concedes that
“terroristic violence is so horrible that people tend to instinctively believe that terrorists are both sociopathic and irrational” (p. 1). However, he believes that most terrorists are rational people with tactical goals.
Counter


“Conceding that an opposing point is valid and then building upon it to further one's own claim allows a writer to make the audience feel appreciated without giving up her or his own position.”
Terms in a Toulmin Argument http://www.winthrop.edu/wcenter/wcenter/toulmin.htm
Counter

You may choose to
 build each of your main points as a contrast to oppositional claims.
 offer a counterargument after you have articulated your main claims.
Organizing Your Argument
Purdue University Writing Lab
Index
Thesis
Body/CSW
Counter
Organizing
Checklist

Introduction
CON
PRO —first argument
CON
PRO —second argument
CON
PRO —third argument
Conclusion
Counter

Thesis: Snowmobiles should be banned in
Yellowstone National Park.
CON It may be hard to imagine that 1,100 snowmobiles a day could cause an air pollution problem in a park the size of Connecticut, but they can.
PRO —The air pollution at park entrances has already become so bad that . . . park rangers have been forced to wear respirators.
C ounter

PRO: Snowmobiles pollute.
PRO: Snowmobiles are noisy.
PRO: Snowmobiles are costly to police and park funds are limited.
CON : Opponents of a ban say. . .
but …
Counter

PRO —pollution
PRO —noise ban
PRO —cost
CON —Opponents of a ban argue that a central mission of the park is to provide access [to all, not just the physically fit]. Admittedly, winter access is important, but ordinary people can enjoy the park by means other than snowmobiles….
C ounter


Language to show you’re aware of opposing opinions
 http://www.eslplanet.com/teachertools/arguew eb/2bothsds.htm - langsum
 Model papers:
 http://word-crafter.net/CompII/argument.html
Counter

 Weakest to strongest OR
 Strongest to weakest
Index
Thesis
Body/CSW
Counter
Organizing
Checklist

 Weakest to strongest
(if you expect audience to agree)
 Strongest to weakest
(if you have to convince audience)
Counter

 Con; Pro; Pro; Pro
 Pro; Pro; Pro; Con
 Con —Pro; Con—Pro; Con—Pro
Counter

Introduction
(Background)
Body
 Con ; Pro; Pro; Pro
 Pro; Pro; Pro; Con
 Con —Pro; Con —Pro; Con —Pro
(Solution; predictions about future….
)
Conclusion
Counter




The SetUp/Reject Model http://atc.bentley.edu/courses/resources/ lweinstein/24-1setupl.htm
The Comparison Model http://atc.bentley.edu/courses/resources/ lweinstein/24-1compare.htm
Hybrids (combinations) http://atc.bentley.edu/courses/resources/ lweinstein/24-1hybrids.htm
Counter

•
•
•
Introduction
•
• Is my thesis arguable?
Have I given readers a reason to care?
Body
•
•
• Have I used Claim-Support-Warrant?
Does my evidence really support my argument?
Do I acknowledge other views and counterargue?
Conclusion
• Have I summarized my position and why it matters?
Index
Thesis
Body/CSW
Counter
Organizing
Checklist
Summary

•
•
•
•
•
Chapter 11 (thesis statement & blueprint)
Chapter 23 (supporting evidence) infotrac.thomsonlearning.com/ infowrite/critical.html (fallacies) bedfordstmartins.com/ online/cite6.html (integrating quotations) www.word-crafter.net/CompII (argument)
Summary