Useful steps to writing an argumentative essay

In the argumentative essay, you must express your opinion on the formulated problem, agreeing or disagreeing with the author’s position. In your answer, you must give two arguments, based on knowledge, life or reader experience.

It is not enough to declare your opinion formally: I agree (disagree) with the author. Your position, even if it coincides with the author’s one, should be formulated in a separate sentence.

For example, thus, the author seeks to convey to the reader the idea that nature has long needed the help of each of us. I fully agree with the author and also believe that humanity should reconsider its consumer attitude to nature.

Then your position should be supported by two arguments. In this part of the work you must strictly follow the rules of constructing the text-reasoning. The argumentation is the presence of explanations, evidence, and examples to explain any thought before the readers/listeners or the person you’re talking to.

Arguments are the evidence that is supported in the thesis:
  • Facts
  • Examples
  • Statements
  • Explanations

So, arguments are anything that can be confirmed by the thesis.

Below, you will find steps to writing an argumentative essay that will help you create a qualitative paper.

The structure of the argumentation

Argumentation consists of the thesis, arguments, and demonstration.

  • The thesis is the formulation of your position (your opinion, your proposal to the other side, etc.).
  • Arguments are the positions, the evidence that you give to justify your point of view. Arguments answer the question of why you should believe in something or do something.
  • Demonstration is the connection between the thesis and the argument (that is, the process of proof, beliefs).
With the help of arguments, you can completely or partially change the position and opinion of your interlocutor. To achieve success in a business conversation, you must adhere to some of the most important rules:
  • One should operate with simple, clear, precise, and convincing terms.
  • Speak the truth; if you are not sure that the information is true, do not use it until you check it.
  • The pace and methods of argumentation should be chosen taking into account the nature of the character and habits of the interlocutor.
  • The argument should be correct in relation to the interlocutor. Refrain from personal attacks on those who do not agree with you.
  • It is necessary to avoid informal expressions and formulations that make it difficult to perceive what has been said, but the speech must be imaginative, and the arguments clear. If you give negative information, be sure to name the source from which you take your information and arguments.

If you are well acquainted with your subject, then you probably already have at your disposal some arguments. However, in most cases, if you are going to convince your partners it will be useful for you to stock up convincing arguments in advance. For this you can, for example, compile their list, weigh and select the strongest.

But how correctly to evaluate which of the arguments are strong, and which ones should be discarded? There are several criteria for evaluating arguments:
  • Good arguments should be based on facts. Therefore, from the list of your arguments you can immediately exclude those that you cannot back up with actual data.
  • Your arguments should have the most direct relation to the case. If it is not so, discard them.
  • Your arguments should be relevant to your opponents, so you need to find out in advance how much they can be interesting and timely for them.

Methods for argumentation

In modern scientific and educational literature, many methods of argumentation are covered. Let’s consider the most important of them for situations of business communication and that will be useful when working on steps to writing an argumentative essay.

The fundamental method of argumentation

The essence of it is in a direct appeal to the interlocutor, whom you are introducing to the facts that are the basis of your evidence.

A significant role here is played by digital examples and statistical data. They are a perfect background for confirming your theses. After all, unlike the information stated in the words – often controversial – the numbers look more convincing: this source is usually more objective and therefore attractive.

Using statistical details, it is important to know the extent: a heap of figures bores the readers, and the arguments don’t have the required effect on them. Remember that statistical materials that are not properly prepared can confuse readers.

For example, the Rector cites statistical data on first-year students. From them it follows that during the year, 50% of the students got married. This figure is impressive, but then it turns out that there were only two students on the course, and one of them married. In order for statistical data to be illustrative, they must cover a large number of people, events, phenomena, etc.

The method of contradiction in the argumentation

In its essence, it is defensive. It is based on revealing contradictions in reasoning, as well as arguments of the interlocutor and sharpening of attention to them.

Method of comparison for argumentation

It is very effective and has exceptional value (especially when comparisons are matched successfully).

It adds an exceptional brightness and a great power of suggestion to the speech of the initiator of communication. To a certain extent, in fact, it is a special form of the method of extracting conclusions. This is another way to make the statement more visible and weighty.

Especially if you have learned to use analogies, comparisons with objects, and phenomena well known to listeners.

The method of argumentation “yes,... but...”

It is best used when the interlocutor refers to the topic of conversation with some prejudice. Since any process, phenomenon or object has in its manifestation both positive and negative points, the “yes,... but...” method allows us to consider other options for resolving the issue.

For example, “I also imagine everything that you have listed as advantages. But you forgot to mention a number of shortcomings....” And here you begin to consistently complement the one-sided picture proposed by the interlocutor from a new point of view.

The method of argumentation of “pieces”

It is used often – especially now, when instead of monologues dialogue, conversation, discussion actively is used. The essence of the method is in the dismemberment of your interlocutor’s monologue into clearly discernible parts:
  • “It’s for sure”
  • “It’s doubtful”
  • “There are very different points of view”
  • “This is clearly wrong”

In fact, the method is based on the well-known thesis: since in any situation, let alone finding a conclusion, one can always find something unreliable, erroneous or exaggerated, then a confident beginning makes it possible to unload the situation to a certain extent, complex.

For example, “What you reported on the model of modern warehousing is theoretically quite true, but in practice there are often very significant deviations from the proposed model: long delays on the part of suppliers, difficulties in obtaining raw materials, sluggishness of the administration...”.

The “boomerang” method of argumentation

It gives an opportunity to use the weapon of the interlocutor against him. It has no force of proof, but it has an exceptional impact on the audience, especially if it is applied with a fair amount of wit.

The “ignoring” method of argumentation

As a rule, it is most often used in conversations, debates, and disputes. Its essence is the fact stated by the interlocutor, cannot be denied by you, but its value and significance can be successfully ignored. It seems to you that the interlocutor attaches importance to something that, in your opinion, is not so important. You state this and analyze it.

The “conclusions” method of argumentation

It is based on a gradual subjective change in the essence of the matter. For example, “Wealth does not have borders when it goes abroad on a large scale” or “Small fry knows best who will get the profit. But who will listen to the small fry?”

The “visible support” method of argument

It requires particularly careful preparation. It is most useful to use it when you act as an opponent (for example, in a discussion). What is its essence? For example, the interlocutor outlined his arguments, facts, evidence on the problem of discussion, and now it’s your turn. But at the beginning of your speech you do not contradict him at all and do not mind.

Moreover, to the surprise of those present, come to the rescue, bringing new provisions in his favor. But all this only for visibility. And then there is a counterattack. For example, “However... you forgot to include in your thesis more such facts... (list them), and this is not all, because...”. Now comes the turn of your counterarguments, facts, and evidence.

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.