Let's say that you've begun researching the topic area, you've made some extensive notes and now you are feeling that the time has come to write. What are you going to write?
Remember at this stage what I said in the beginning: an essay is an argument about something trying to show your skills in the analysis of texts and the synthesis of ideas. That is to say: you need to argue something. Before you start writing ask yourself this absolutely crucial question: what am I arguing for? What thesis am I proposing and defending?
It will help you no end if you sit down, right now, and nut out a single sentence - a sentence that is clear to you, and that takes a position. Be a little bit brave even. Go on - what's life for, if not to live a little dangerously?
Actually, I am quite serious: a little courage in framing your argument is a good thing. You can always modify your statement as you go along. What you are putting up is a working thesis - that is, it is something for your essay to lean against while you write it. You may at the end of the process come back and change your thesis entirely.
Now, consider these two images:
On the right you have the classic on/off switch. It only has two positions: on and, well, off. You can switch it on. And you can switch it off. That's really all it does.
On the left is another design classic: the volume knob. It has 10 numbers which indicate a spectrum of positions. (It may even have 11, but that's another story, one about Marshall stacks, and so on.
Now: you might be a personality that prefers everything in the world to be a matter of on or off. Yes or no. Black and white (you knew I was going to say that, right?).
But the thing is that in an argument in which you are trying to convince the marker of your ability to make subtle distinctions, your really have to operate as if the world had volume knobs on it rather than on/off switches. That is: there may be degrees of certainty, elements of moderation, and many other ways of sitting between the extremes on a spectrum that give your essay greater persuasive power. This is partly because sitting at one extreme is often claiming far too much than you can possibly establish in your short piece.
Let me take you back to one of our sample questions:
Is ‘conscious eternal torment’ the only sound Biblical and theological description of the nature of hell?
You can see that this question is actually inviting you to take an extreme position - the word 'only' is the giveaway. But it would be a bit of a trap to accept that invitation. It would show a degree of analytical sophistication if you were rather to argue that (if this is your opinion) 'conscious eternal torment' is the most convincing interpretation of the Biblical material. Instead of using your on/off switch, you've used your volume dial - and you've settled on a 9 on that dial perhaps, but you've used a much more nuanced way of measuring the results of your study.
How are you going to argue for your thesis? Arguments can take various shapes. Here are some:
1) the cumulative argument is an argument that is in effect constituted by a list of points that do not necessarily relate to one another but that, when added all together, make the case. Because you don't have to say how the points relate, the cumulative argument is a very simple form to use - it works well in exams especially. Its weakness is that it doesn't make for a logical whole; and if you don't treat each piece of evidence carefully, it can look like each piece has equal weight - which is unlikely. The other problem is how you might deal with objections and counterarguments - but you can do this under each point as you go through.
2) the sparring partner argument is an argument in which you chiefly wrestle with the argument of another in a critical way. What you need to do here is offer an in depth AND FAIR exposition of their work and then engage with it, modifying it as you see fit. Don't worry about originality - even a small adjustment can be a new perspective on the problem. Your wrestle with the sparring partner may lead to fresh insights. It could be that the thinker is from a very different perspective than your own - and adapting their work critically leads to a very provocative synthesis. The danger of course is that you become intimidated or overwhelmed by the sparring partner.
3) the thesis proposed and dissected argument is one that I have found theologian John Webster using. He starts with a detailed proposition and then takes it apart element by element, before putting it back together at the end. This argument can be aesthetically quite tidy and also means that you concentrate on concepts that hang together rather than bits from here and there.
4) the evaluate the alternatives on the table argument immediately plunges you into the tradition of the discussion of the matter at hand and shows your awareness of the secondary literature discussion. You can explain each alternative, offer an evaluation according to strengths and weaknesses, and then offer your own synthesis, or choose the strongest option. The danger is that if you don't do a good job of describing the alternatives the whole thing looks like a mess.
TIP: you know those 'Three/Four/Five Views On' books? Do take great care when using these: they are designed for people just like you and they are inviting you to take a huge shortcut. Some students think they can do their entire research from one of these books. The essays are inevitably of uneven quality in these books. And what's more: I think they leave students feeling completely confused. I know I feel confused...
Well, that'll do for the moment. Are there any other argument types that I could add to this list?
0 comments:
Post a Comment