1

BUILDING AN ARGUMENT

How to write analytically

2

What are the overall characteristics of a good essay?

What does a paragraph need?

How do you support your argument?

How do you convince your reader?

Class Activity: What makes a good argumentative essay?

3

Outline1. Structure

2. Description vs. Argumentation & Analysis

3. Fact & Evidence vs. Opinion

4. Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research

5. Nuance and Persuasion

4

1. Structure

How does Mahmood Mamdani explain mass participation in the 1994 Rwandan genocide? Do you find his arguments convincing? If

so, why?

5

1. Structure- Overall structure is important!

- Introductions provide an initial roadmap to your argument - Introductions should contain:

- 1-2 lead-in sentences- A clear thesis statement- A brief outline of your argument

6

The Rwandan genocide took place in 1994 and about 800 000 people were killed within the 100 day genocide. This means that the Rwandan genocide was three times more effective than the Holocaust, even though the total number of people killed in the Holocaust was higher. This paper will consider what Mamdani argued to be the reason for mass participation in the Rwandan genocide. After this, the paper will consider whether or not his arguments were convincing.

Introductions – Exhibit A

7

Why is this weak? Unnecessary background

information. No evidence of research (i.e. no

mention what Mamdani’s argument is).

Repetition of the question without insight.

No clear thesis statement – it is not clear from this introduction what position the paper will be trying to prove.

8

Mahmood Mamdani argues that fear is the main factor that explains the mass participation in the genocide. This is convincing because it allows additional factors to be acknowledged as partial causes, while providing a convincing explanation for how and why these partial causes culminated in 1994. An examination of Mamdani’s thesis will show that the alternative factors (the ‘resource crunch’ and a ‘culture of obedience’) are insufficient explanations for why there was mass participation. The presence of an environment of fear is a necessary factor that triggered participation. However, Mamdani’s thesis risks understating how resource scarcity reinforced the environment of fear. Essentially, it is the combination of the economic situation as well as fear that best explain the degree of involvement in the genocide.

Introductions – Exhibit B

9

Why is this strong? The introduction clearly shows that the

author understood the required reading (Mamdani).

It gives an idea of what will be covered by the paper (i.e. the alternative explanations Mamdani examines).

The thesis statement is clear – the author agrees with Mamdani’s central thesis about fear but thinks it needs be amended slightly.

This suggests critical thought.

10

1. Structure An ‘analytical’ essay could look like this:

Introduction. 1. Brief summary of main author’s argument. 2. Main author’s strong points – analyse and support

with other authors and context/background. 3. Point of weakness 1 – criticise using other authors,

background and context. 4. Point of weakness 2 – criticise using other authors,

background and context 5. Point of weakness 3 – criticise using other authors,

background and context Conclusion

11

1. Structure Avoid descriptive essays! A prime example

of a descriptive structure would be something like this: Intro 1. The history of the conflict 2. Summary of Main Author argument 3. Summary of Supplementary Author X 4. Summary of Supplementary Author Y 5. Analysis Conclusion

12

1. Structure Every argument is made up of sub-arguments.

E.g. in order to argue that Mamdani has understated the role of economic scarcity, one has to convincingly show why this factor was important.

Sub-arguments come in two types: A. Supporting your main argument with logic and

evidence giving credibility to your position. B. Supporting your main argument by discrediting

someone else’s opposing/alternative argument with logic and evidence.

13

“What was the main cause of the RUF insurgency in Sierra Leone?”

Let’s make an outline of how you may go about answering this question. Thesis statement: pick one cause

The economic decline in the country was the main cause Sub-argument A: Make points supported by evidence in

favour of your cause The RUF had no real political ideology. (Refute political grievance)

Sub-argument B: Make points supported by evidence that discredit alternative causal explanations All recruited members of the RUF were poor and unemployed.

Sub-argument C: Make points that favour your cause and/or discredit alternatives. The RUF made a habit of looting and raiding civilians, and diamond

mines. (Refute political grievance) Therefore: Economic issues far outweighed political issues.

14

2. Description vs. Argumentation & Analysis

You need to support every single claim you make in your argument with:- Factual evidence- Other author’s arguments

Ask yourself: “so what?” – information that you include should be able to answer this magical question.

Don’t assume that your audience knows why something you bring up is important. Make your train of thought, and every point’s relevance explicit!

15

Using background information/factual evidence

Avoid lengthy descriptions. Get to the point; show how it ties in with your

argument! Think carefully about how much detail is actually

needed to make your point. For example, if your point is that ideas of citizenship

were influenced by the colonial experience, you need only briefly explain that the Belgians considered the Tutsi to be an alien ‘race’, whereas the Hutu were treated as native ‘ethnicity’. The background information needed is simply that there

was a division created around these groups by the Belgians. Move on to make your point about why it was important for mass participation in the genocide.

16

Using other authors’ arguments to support your own

You may want to support your own point with an argument another author has made.

You cannot simply summarise their point and think that is sufficient.

You need to demonstrate why their point is significant for your argument.

For example, Author B has argued that ‘fear’ extends beyond a concern about death, and that it also includes fears about financial security. This is significant since it demonstrates that resource scarcity may contribute towards a general feeling of fear. Thus, it could be said that Mamdani’s definition of fear may be too narrow.

This example shows why Author B’s point is relevant, as well as how it can be used to critique Mamdani.

17

3. Fact & Evidence vs. Opinion You shouldn’t use someone else’s claims and arguments

uncritically and leave them unsubstantiated in your essay.

In order to do this, though, you need to read critically: What evidence has been used? Is his or her argument strong and well-supported, or just an

opinion? Big name does not equal validity!

You must decide (and show) how strong that argument is by critically evaluating the information

and/or facts that author uses to support his/her argument.

18

3. Fact & Evidence vs. OpinionPlease avoid at all costs: Presenting other authors’ opinions as facts. Uncritically subscribing to someone else’s

weak arguments. Misrepresenting an authors’ argument and

twist it out of shape to support their own viewpoint

Sometimes, this is done inadvertently – be careful how you phrase things!

19

“At the core of the ideology of Hutu Power was the conviction that the Tutsi were a race alien to Rwanda, and not an indigenous ethnic group. The shift in political vocabulary was a return to the vision of the colonial period. That the Tutsi were a race not indigenous to Rwanda was both central to colonial ideology and a key idea that had propelled forward the 1959 Revolution.” (Mamdani, 2001: 190).

What is Mamdani reiterating here? A fact or an opinion?(Mamdani, M. 2001. When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda. Princeton University Press)

Class Activity – Fact vs. Opinion

20

Student A: “Moreover, the kingship of Rwabugiri institutionalized ethnicity when prior to that all Rwandans were categorised under the term Badusi. It was also a period of Tutsi power and Hutu oppression. It was believed that the Tutsi were an alien race to the Rwandan topography and not a minority ethnicity (Mamdani, 2001: 190).”

Student B: “The Tutsi were an alien group in Rwanda, so the Hutu felt threatened and oppressed in their own country, which worked as a catalyst leading up to the genocide (Mamdani, 2001: 190).”(Mamdani, M. 2001. When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda. Princeton University Press)

Reiterating Mamdani’s point

21

4. Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research

Some Common Assumptions

Quantitative Research is…

Qualitative Research is…

More scientific

More objective

More methodologically rigorous

Less scientific

More subjective

Less methodologically rigorous

22

4. Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research

What are the assumptions behind the approach to the issue? What sorts of questions are asked, and why?

How are real-world phenomena turned into variables that can be quantified? That a variable is the best approximation possible

or that the data is the best that could be obtained does not mean that the research is without problems!

How is the data interpreted? What claims are made based on the data? Numbers never just speak for themselves!

23

4. Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research

- Who are the participants, and what are their potential ulterior motives?

- How does the researcher relate to the participants?

- How is the data interpreted? What claims are made based on the data? How transparent is the author about the

process of interpretation? Are generalisations supported by the data?

24

4. Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research

Good research – whether quantitative or qualitative – needs to be: Open about its assumptions, theoretical

background and limitations. Transparent about and rigorous in its

methodology. Clear how data was interpreted in order

to arrive at its conclusions. Avoid claims it cannot really substantiate.

25

5. Nuance & Persuasion Stronger claims do not necessarily make your

argument stronger! This applies to the body of your essay as well as your final conclusion. It is easier to criticise a claim that is phrased too

strongly than it is to dispute a cautious statement.

In the social sciences there is never just one answer, explanation or interpretation – to claim that yours is the absolute best, one and only answer is asking to be criticised!

26

How can you make these phrases “safer”?

- This proves…- This example shows…- The main cause was…- He completely ignores that fact that…- One can definitely see that…- The truth is that…

Class Activity – Safer Statements

27

Wrapping upA good argumentative essay: Is logically structured. Has a clear introduction. Makes explicit, why certain points/pieces of

information and evidence are relevant Does not misrepresent other authors’

arguments just to “prove” a point. Engages critically with the literature. Makes cautious conclusions rather than stark

statements.

28

This presentation is licenced under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 South Africa License. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/za/ 

Or

send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94105, USA.