Using "They Say"

When a person is forming an argument it seems very odd to introduce an opposing argument. The majority of people try to avoid doing this; pretending like their's is the only argument. So why would we do this? Why would we bring up a viewpoint contrary to our own? One reason is that we can strengthen our own arguments by weakening others. When I use an opposing argument to bolster my own I like to imagine that my argument is a fire, and opposing arguments are wood. When I introduce the opposing arguments, my argument not only destroys them, but grows bigger and stronger because of it.

Another reason to introduce an opposing argument to your audience is to take the strong points of that claim and use them to capture the idea of your own argument. In this style you say, "I agree with him when he says____, but the way he wraps up his argument is incorrect."This method not only helps to bolster the legitimate strength of your claim, but also develops you as an intelligent and unbiased author in the eyes of your audience.

They Say

In order to form a well thought out argument you must have an opposing argument. Using the "they say" idea helps us to present a point in our arguments. The "they say" method can create a stance for us to take, and help present that stance to the reader. When using what others think we can agree, disagree, or both. If the ideas of others are used correctly in an argument, regardless of the stance we take, it will help us to improve the formation of our own ideas. If we disagree, other's ideas give us something to argue against. If we agree, it allows us a starting point to develop on. If we agree with part, but disagree with another part, it allows the opportunity to interject our own voice, and argue why part of it is wrong. The saying "it takes two to Tango" is correct. We need a voice to develop a good argument. If we do not use an other's point of view we might as well be arguing with ourselves. When we use other's ideas we actually improve our side of the argument.

In an argument it is important to use what others say, but you must interject your own feelings or analysis promptly. If we do not develop our thought immediately we leave the reader to develop their own ideas. In an argument this is not advantageous. In an argument we want to tell the reader how they should feel, before they have time to figure out how they feel. This method helps create a strong argument. After the reader is done with reading about our point of view, then we want them to form their own ideas, but not before we are done.

George Orwell Response

In his writing, George Orwell seems to be extremely irritated with the way the English language has been used recently.  Orwell expresses his concern with the English language, especially in politics, by giving examples of typical mistakes made.  One mistake I can easily relate to is one’s failure to translate or paraphrase ideas while still keeping the same meaning.  He demonstrates this by translating a passage from Ecclesiastes into “modern english” from “good english”.  This example of paraphrasing by Orwell shows that if a writer does not take the time to examine the original writing thoroughly, then “concrete illustrations [...] can dissolve into vague phrases”.  For most writers it may be difficult to fully illustrate an idea in their own words.  Writers have to face challenges when it comes to conveying an idea: do not use meaningless or empty words, do not use too few words (missing the whole idea all together) or do not shape the idea to fit your own meaning.  Orwell wants us to get pass using hollow words or complex phrasing that can lead us to become “human machines”.  In everyday conversations we can point out some the typical metaphors or phrases that Orwell lists.  How many of the individuals involved in these conversations know the true meaning of the these metaphors or understand the wordy phrases?  The purpose of Orwell’s essay is to offer suggestions to turn from the laziness of the English language; Orwell’s desire is for writers to flee from vague meaningless writing.

While reading Orwell’s response I found myself comparing much of what he used as negative examples to what I do as a writer.  As I’m sure many writers do, I fall into the ease of replacing words with something that does not quite fulfill an image.  As Orwell pointed out, “the writer either has a meaning and cannot express it, or he inadvertently says something else, or he is almost indifferent as to whether his words mean anything or not”.  I do this all the time in my writing.  I regularly use a thesaurus while writing, and though sometimes this can be very useful, it also tempts me to use words that may not have the meaning to what I am trying to state.  For my argument paper I hope to meditate on Orwell’s writing to avoiding falling into the cycle of lazy writing.

Orwell Response

The author seems irritated that people do not take the correct steps to create an argument paper that catches the attention of the reader. In the essay he states that the development of language needs to increase and it is curable. For the most part language is a major influence on the way we write papers. Writers' become vague in their papers and it ultimately gives the paper a lack of focus. Orwell wants writers to get to the point and make it thorough. He also states that creating imagery, expressing private opinions, and papers that contain precision are things that allow a paper to be enjoyed. Orwell also gives tips to writers when writing a paper that include never using a large word when a small one will do.

The entire point of this essay is to get writers' to be more prepared when they are writing future papers. I thought metaphors were good for a paper but it looks like the author thinks metaphors are unnecessary. Orwell does a good job in not trying to "fix" all the mistakes writers make, but he makes it so writers like myself can improve with each paper. Orwell gives interesting facts about past writings and clearly points out mistakes to make it easier on each person reading this essay.

Orwell Response

This reading made me blush. How do we write? Orwell's frustration with writing, and language si aparent. The vagueness of which we write is appaling. "There is nothing new under the sun," applies to writing as well. I was shocked realizing what lazy attributes lay exposed in my writings. The thought occured to me as I was reading that many of the phrases we use everyday, in spoken and written language, have already been plucked from the tree of knowledge. How do we as writers, convey a point using words and phrases that are vague by nature? It is nearly impossible to write a meaningful paper while using these phrases. A point is exactly as it sounds, a point as if on the tip of a needle, sharp. Using vague and often murky language trying to develop a point, is like using a ball to sew. The only time that language should be used is to confuse or bore the reader into reliquishment of their own thoughts.

The reading is important to all writers of an argument. Development of the language we use in the paper helps us to project our idea clearly. A murky argument is easily dismissed, due to the lack of thought. A writer must develop his thought and his language. If his thought is not complete his point will suffer. As will his point suffer with the use of poor language.

"Writing an Argument" Reading Response

Arguing is a part of human nature.  Every family has a father like Ballenger’s that is fond of arguing just for the thrill of the argument.  In his writing, Ballenger takes on the task of explaining how to develop a good argument, whether it be an informal op-ed or a formal academic paper.  Ballenger focuses on how important it is for a writer to have both strong opinions, but to be open to other explanations and ways of thinking.  I see this demonstrated in my person life with my family, similar to Ballenger’s.  Arguing at family get togethers is nothing unusual.  Within the arguments, family members may have extremely different opinions, but they are open to what is being discussed around them.  As Ballenger stated, “[...] they often were getting along because argument and conflict in some cultures is an expression of commitment and caring” (203).  But how do we go from informal dinner table arguments to formal persuasive essays or argument papers?  

Before investigating our argument, we have to make sense of our preconceived viewpoints and assumptions, or warrants as Toulman states it.  As a writer we have to explore different aspects to either support or change our warrants.  In order to do this, Ballenger suggests that we need to stop thinking about our argument as black or white, with two simple sides.  Developing an argument is complex and may have more sides than those that first appear.  According to Ballenger, an arguer does not simply pick sides, but searches for the truth.  “This is an open-ended as well as a closed process; it involves suspending judgement and coming to conclusions, hearing what has already been said and discovering what you think” (208).  This holds true in both formal arguments along with informal op-eds.

Reading Ballenger’s explanations and opinions on what contributes to a good argument has been very informative.  Ballenger pointed out on more than on occasion that some argument papers do not first state their thesis at the beginning of their paper.  I found this very interesting, having always included my thesis in introductions myself.  However, having a delaying thesis seems very reasonable.  While writing an argument paper, you work towards your thesis through research and exploration, coming across different ideas that may have not reached your attention before.  Along with the delayed thesis idea, Ballenger’s emphasis on the importance of providing evidence to support claims has allowed me to become aware of how crucial it is to gather enough information to do this.  Overall this read has prepared me with ideas and explanations to get started writing an argument paper.

Ballenger and Argument

Merely an hour before doing this reading response I was engaged in a discussion with my wife over the point and necessity of general education requirements. I argued that they were mainly a waste of my time as most of them have very little to do with my chosen course of study. I told her I was never going to use what I learned in those classes; so what was the point in taking them in the first place? My wife argued that they were necessary in molding students and making them more well rounded and better educated. A few minutes after as my wife looked over the requirements she would need for her History degree she realized she would have to take three science classes. Suddenly, she no longer argued for the general education requirements but rather started expounding over the uselessness of needing science to teach history.

Ballenger uses this very example in his chapter to convey that there are usually more than two sides to every argument. He states: "...it would be misleading to think that these are the only two possible positions on general education requirements in American universities." My wife found herself torn between these positions and thinking about it more deeply rather than accepting one over the other. Ballenger discusses method of discovery and evaluation which are invaluable tools in argument. Using my wife as an example again: Jessica realized after further thought that although science is often viewed as being on the opposite side of the spectrum from the study of history; in actuality there are certain science courses that strengthen the study of history. Learning the scientific method of inquiry, hypotheses and investigation can aid the history student as they research and delve into complex concepts. Ballenger's model follows a similar guide: investigate, explore, explain, reflect.


If one uses serious inquiry and a deeper thought process we can expand our knowledge by looking at an argument from more than the standard two sided view. Introspection into arguments and ideas allows us to gain a deeper understanding for the topic at hand. This corresponds with Ballenger's following point: " To argue well is an act of imagination, not a picking of sides."

I hope that as I continue to work on my paper I can keep this model and basis in my mind as I delve into the different sides and arguments that are pertinent to my subject matter.

Response to Writing an Argument

Ballenger is writing to explain how to correctly construct a proper argument paper. I think a major point he is trying to get accross is that catching the attention of the reader is the most important thing when writing the argument paper, and there are ways to prove your point when writing the paper that makes it worth reading. The closed argument model consists of a pre-existing opinion or belief about the topic, gathering evidence to support your opinion, and an argument for pre-existing beliefs with reasons and evidence to support. All these components are key in a successful argument. Ballenger also explains the different methods of development of an argument paper and which techniques a writer can use to be successful. These include a narrative, question to answer, problem to solution, cause to effect or effect to cause, and using evidence. He goes off into the importance of evidence and how it can make or break your argument and also states that there are not only two sides to every argument. If you argue a side opposed to another side there is a good chance the argument will be weak. Instead, writers should "respect the complexcity of the subject and examine it from a variety of perspectives and not just the two opposing sides."

Ballenger's guide has greatly helped me especially in the sense that I will no longer be so closed minded in my views of the argument. I think it is important to know that I can still strongly get my point across to the reader, but give different perspectives on the topic that can ultimately make my point even stronger. I believe that evidence is something writers take for granted because they have such strong feelings for the topic that the opinions of others are not put into perspective. At the same time, evidence can contrast with some aspects of a writer's paper, which is why I think Ballenger makes a good point about getting different perspectives on complex subjects. With this guideline I will be more prepared to compare and contrast my ideas with more than just one other perspective on my topic.

The Curious Writer Reading Response

In this chapter, Ballenger is explaining how to properly form an argument paper. Of course, to begin writing an argument paper we must know how to clearly form an argument. Logical fallacies aside, an argument has many other components that can affect its clarity. The British born philosopher, Stephen Toulmin, developed an outline for a properly constructed argument. In this "Toulmin Model" a person must create a claim out of clear data. The first step in forming an argument by Toulmin's standards is to develop a warrant from the data that leads to a claim. The warrant is just the logical steps that you take to arrive at your claim. After you have warranted a claim you must qualify this claim with both backing and rebuttal. Backing is the point at which you qualify your claim by simply restating the logical process involved in your warrant. After this you rebut yourself; introducing and refuting claims that can be made in opposition to your own. I have spent a lot of time in argument over my life, and I have found that good arguments always have this form (Toulmin).

Now what would this form look like? Well it starts with data. For the sake of starting an argument, I am going to say that from the years 2007 through 2009 the total national banana import fell by eight million bananas in the United States. Coinciding with this data is the fact that the hip fracture numbers in the US fell by two-thousand fractures. Now I have my data. At this point I start to analyze this data, applying a basic logical conclusion. As banana imports fell, so did hip fracture rates. I can now create a claim that banana peels are the leading cause of hip fractures in the US. My warrant is simple; as A fell so did B, thus A falling causes B to fall. This is simple logic. Now I must qualify this claim. I could simply state that the numbers are obvious and they do not lie; a sort of appeal to the unwavering ethical stature of numbers. I then rebut myself by saying that there are those who claim that hip fractures are caused by osteoporosis. This is an easy claim to refute because I can state that osteoporosis does not break the bones, it simply makes them break easier. I now have a complete argument. This claim may not be accurate but it is legitimate simply because of its form. I try to never include an argument in any of my writing that does not follow this guideline.

Toulmin, Stephen. The Uses of Argument. 2nd. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1958. Print.

Reading Response

Ballenger is trying to convey how to correctly form an argument paper. He starts by giving examples on the formation of an argument. This formation is an important part to the argument, without a correct idea, or hypothesis, an argument will be weak, or non-convincing. Arguments, or discussions are a way to gain knowledge. So if an argument paper is formed weakly no one will learn the point of view the author is trying to convey. He is also trying to help his reader develop the argument paper by explaining the different aspects of an argument paper. He explains that there are different ways to write an argument paper, narrative, question to answer, problem to solution, effect to cause, or cause to effect, or a combination of these. These forms help shape the idea that the author has into a cognitive paper. He also explains that the argument paper must contain evidence, and analysis. These are very effective means to persuade the audience to "see things your way." Through the formation, development, evidence, and analysis we can convey our ideas in a clear and concise manner to inform the audience of our point of view.

This is a very informative guide at this point of our paper. It should help us by giving us ideas on the formation of our paper. After reading this, I had some of the inspiration I needed to get started on the writing of my own paper. Up until this point the ideas I had were a jumbled mess in my brain. Ideas that did not flow smoothly together, and ideas that I wanted to talk about, but had no fluidity with other ideas. This reading allowed those ideas to take form, and start becoming a cognitive paper.

The Cost of Postage Stamps

Have you ever noticed that puppies are really cute but they won't stop licking your face even if you ask them nicely. How annoying is that?

I am tired

And I want to go to sleep.

What the .... I hate bloggers

sample post

sample post