micah, response

Response to Bruce Ballenger's "Writing an Argument"

Ballenger's chapter on writing an argumentative essay was quite enlightening in respect to its examination of the different parts to an argument, and I wish I had read this years ago. His analysis of the factors needed in an argumentative essay is straightforward, and I can see how many of my previous papers related to his breakdown. I was particularly interested in his ideas on how to view the paper itself, I've always assumed an argumentative paper was to convince others that your thesis was correct and that others were incorrect, a very black and white view, but after reading this I realize my writing style is probably pretty combative. I've often started writing with only my view in mind and would often ignore counter evidence, so as not to devalue my own argument. Ballenger states that counter views should be included and explored if only to refute them.

Another part that really stuck with me was the part on generalizations. I see this all the time in magazines and periodicals, and I'm guilty of writing papers with gross generalizations that may not be supported by actual evidence, but instead popular opinion. Generalizations can be useful, but need to be supported by factual evidence.

I really enjoyed his views on how arguments are beneficial if conducted in an open manner. I personally love a good discussion, but I see how in writing being overbearing can cause a reader to reject you essay simply on the tone it is written in. I think for this next essay I'm going to need to take a less assertive stance and give actual credence to conflicting view points.

Overall I found this reading very helpful and I'm going to try to keep some of the ideas expressed in mind while writing my next paper.