THE THESIS AS STARTING POINT
It is important to have a working thesis before you begin writing your
paper. By creating a thesis first, you will be able to:
• focus your thinking: a thesis guides your thought process
during the writing of your paper.
• stay on track while writing: similarly, a thesis gives you a
focal point for your argument and for your supporting
paragraphs; each paragraph should connect back to the thesis.
• think about your reader: the thesis statement is a promise you
make to the reader – it is what your reader will take away from
the paper. By creating the thesis, you can think from the
perspective of both the writer and the reader, and make certain
that your paper fulfills your promise to your reader.
2 PARTS
• A thesis usually has two parts:
• Topic: states the subject of the essay
• Comment: states what you will prove about that subject
• Without a comment, a thesis is merely a topic sentence—there is no argument being
offered. This is fine for writing an overview or a book report, but it is insufficient for
an argumentative essay.
• Without a specific topic, a comment (or argument) is impossible. You need to have a
clear understanding of the topic (and a solid base of knowledge about the topic)
before you can form an opinion on it and build an argument around it.
• “In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli puts forth a
political philosophy that is far more complex and
sophisticated than the popular understanding of
the word “Machiavellian” implies.”
1) Topic (what the paper is about): Machiavelli’s political
philosophy
2) Comment (what the paper will prove about this topic):
Machiavelli’s political philosophy is frequently oversimplified and
misrepresented.
This is an effective working thesis: it establishes a clear topic and a comment about that
topic, though it could probably be a bit more specific (it might be useful for the writer to
establish HOW Machiavelli’s philosophy is complex and sophisticated, or to DEFINE
what the word “Machiavellian” implies). Still, it gives the writer a clear goal.
THE QUALITIES OF A GOOD THESIS
STATEMENT
• A good thesis statement has four major characteristics:
• Specific as possible in wording and ideas: always try to be specific with both the
purpose of the argument and the words you use to define the argument. Avoid abstract
words, general terms, or vague ideas.
• Potentially interesting to your intended audience: a good thesis should capture the
interest of your readers. Avoid “fact-based” theses that simply provide the reader with
information. Raise the stakes of the argument by making a dynamic and insightful claim.
• Limits the topic to make it manageable: a thesis should not try to tackle an issue from
every side, nor should it deal with an overly complicated subject. Focus in on a specific
element of the topic and keep the paper manageable.
• Debatable (leaving room for counterarguments): make sure that your argument is
debatable. Remember, you are presenting an argumentative claim, not a fact.
ASSESS THIS THESIS
“In The Prince, Machiavelli states that fear is more important than love
when governing a country.”
• Interesting? –This thesis does not tell the reader anything new or insightful.
• Specific? – The thesis focuses on a specific element of Machiavelli’s philosophy, but it does not make a specific
claim.
• Manageable? – The thesis is manageable, but only because the topic is so straightforward. The writer is setting
up an overview of part of Machiavelli’s philosophy as opposed to offering an argument about that philosophy.
• Arguable ? – The thesis fails to present an argument. Instead, it presents a fact.
ASSESS THIS THESIS
“Machiavelli’s political philosophy is wrong.”
• Interesting? – The writer is disagreeing with Machiavelli, which could lead to an interesting argument, though
the thesis does not provide enough detail to capture the reader’s interest.
• Specific? – The thesis is too broad. It tackles a very broad subject—“Machiavelli’s political philosophy”—and it
uses a very broad term to critique it—“wrong.” Is it morally wrong? Logically wrong? What does the writer mean
by “wrong”?
• Manageable? – The thesis is rather unmanageable. It deals with a very broad subject, and it does not define
“wrongness” concretely enough to guide the writer’s supporting paragraphs.
• Arguable? – The thesis presents an argument, albeit a vague one; still, the writer is on the right track by making a
debatable claim (others might argue that Machiavelli was right.)
Consider the following theses. Each one is a bit better than its predecessor; notice how each thesis
improves in terms of its specificity, its dynamism, and its scope. The final thesis is probably the best of
all the examples listed below, but it has grown naturally from the previous theses.
Machiavelli’s political philosophy is wrong. – As noted on the previous slide, this thesis does not meet our criteria; it is too vague, too
broad, and lacking in details.
Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic for several reasons. – This thesis is a bit stronger
than the previous version. It replaces “wrong” with “problematic” (which is a more specific term), and it establishes that there are reason
for the disagreement, even though it does not list the reasons; unlike the first version, the disagreement with Machiavelli has a basis in
actual issues as opposed to its being based on the reader’s response or feelings. This thesis is setting up an argument as opposed to a
response paper.
Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because it promotes selfishness, tyranny, and
cruelty. – The writer is now listing specific issues that he or she disagrees with in Machiavelli. He or she seems to be setting up a 5paragraph essay, one that will cover the three vices listed above: selfishness, tyranny, and cruelty. Still, selfishness, tyranny, and cruelty
are fairly big, broad concepts. It might be helpful for the writer to narrow the focus of the paper further.
Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because of its emphasis on the self-interest of
political leaders. – Here, the writer has chosen to focus on one specific problem in Machiavelli’s political philosophy: selfishness.
Moreover, he or she has attributed that selfishness to a specific group: political leaders. The focus of the paper is now much tighter and
more specific.
Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because of its emphasis on the self-interest of
political leaders; leaders should seek to serve something larger than themselves, but Machiavelli’s prince seeks only to preserve
his own power. – Here, the writer takes the thesis one step further by actually defining WHY the self-interest of political leaders (as
discussed by Machiavelli) is problematic. This is a dynamic and interesting thesis because the writer is outlining specific terms for the
argument: he or she has put forth a description of what a leader SHOULD do, and set it in contrast to what Machiavelli’s prince does.
Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because of its rejection of noble virtues in favor
of practical self-interests. Instead of aspiring to serve a higher ideal, Machiavelli’s prince conspires to preserve his own power
and wealth. – This thesis is even stronger than the previous version, mainly because of how it is worded. The writer creates a wonderful
sense of balance in the thesis by using parallelism (“noble virtues” vs. “practical self-interests”; “aspiring to serve a higher ideal” vs.
“conspires to preserve his own power.”)
ASSESS THIS THESIS
“On Game of Thrones, many characters have a Machiavellian view of political
power.”
• Interesting?
• Specific?
• Manageable ?
• Arguable ?
How can we make this better?
Consider the following theses. Each one is a bit better than its predecessor; notice how each thesis
improves in terms of its specificity, its dynamism, and its scope. The final thesis is probably the best of
all the examples listed below, but it has grown naturally from the previous theses.
On Game of Thrones, many characters have a Machiavellian view of power. – This thesis makes an interesting observation, but it does not
really indicate why that observation is significant, nor does it address any of the larger consequences regarding the Machiavellian characters on
the TV series.
On Game of Thrones, many characters, such as Tywin, Littlefinger, and Tyrion, have a Machiavellian view of power. – Here the writer is
providing some examples, but the thesis is still lacking somewhat in terms of its argumentative strength. The reader is not quite sure what the
writer intends to prove. Here again, the writer seems to be setting up a fairly broad 5-paragraph essay.
On Game of Thrones, Tyrion Lannister has a Machiavellian view of power. – Here, the writer has narrowed the focus to just one character
(probably the most interesting of the three characters.) Since Tyrion Lannister is viewed by many fans as a “good guy,” the writer is making a
fairly bold claim by labeling Tyrion as Machiavellian.
Though many fans of the series Game of Thrones view Tyrion Lannister as a sympathetic character, he takes a Machiavellian approach to
governance. – This thesis establishes that the writer is taking a dynamic and unique position. By indicating that “many fans” like Tyrion, the
writer is defining his or her thesis in contrast to what most people expect or believe, which can make for an interesting argument.
Though many fans of the series Game of Thrones view Tyrion Lannister as a sympathetic character, Tyrion actively supports a tyrannical
and psychotic king, willingly ignores an incestuous conspiracy to destroy a dynasty, and constantly puts practical goals over higher ideals.
His actions are therefore Machiavellian. – Here, the writer goes one step further by establishing Tyrion’s Machiavellian activities. These are the
supporting examples that will likely dominate the supporting paragraphs. Like in the second thesis, the writer is setting up a five paragraph essay,
but he or she is now doing so in a much more focused way.
Though many fans of the series Game of Thrones view Tyrion Lannister as a sympathetic character, his willingness to ignore moral codes
and reject virtuous ideals for the sake of preserving his own family’s power makes him a Machiavellian character. – This thesis is meant to
provide a somewhat “cleaner” version of the previous thesis. Instead of listing all of the examples, it simply uses one sentence to summarize how
the examples are connected (all of the examples show that Tyrion will compromise morality for the sake of keeping the Lannisters in power).
Either of the two theses would work, but this one is a little bit less overwhelming than the previous version. Then again, if the writer wishes to
provide the reader with a “road map” of the examples that will follow in the supporting paragraphs, he or she might want to use the previous
thesis.