- This topic has 4 voices and 23 replies.
-
Posts
-
Let's say you have an 8-10 page paper. How much space do you give to show the weaknesses of your argument?
I would save it for the conclusion. In a paper that size you're building up your argument on most of the pages, and you're not really going to have room to identify and address many weaknesses. I don't think you'd be expected to, either, except briefly.
I would agree with Phid. the last page or two of your paper will be your conclusion and in there you can present and destroy dissenting views. To put them elsewhere weakens your argument by making it seem that you dont really believe in your own thesis.
What if it's something controversial or contradictory. Shouldn't you just “get it over with” at the beginning of the paper?ex: my thesis is in agreement with what Joe and Lou said, but Fred disagrees and here's why.
If you are attacking someone's view then yes. It depends on what the topic of your paper is I guess. One thing I have learned so far in school is that there are no hard and fsat rules when it comes to structuring a paper. I have never gotten any more detailed than Intro, Main Body, and Conclusion. After that my paper's kind of build themselves when I sit down to outline them. My outlines change during writing too.
I'm wondering what exactly you're addressing in your paper and whether it's something you'll want to do in a paper that size. Sure, if there's an 800-pound gorilla in the room that you need to at least mention, identify it in the introduction and say how you're going to support an argument which argues something different. But I would then use the bulk of your paper supporting your thesis rather than addressing every opposing point.Ex. "Traditional historians take it for granted that the Apollo lunar missions were successful in visiting the moon and returning to Earth, but recent findings points to a more "localized" source for the photographic evidence that supports their claims."Maybe that's a bad example... ;D
I guess “weakenesses” in my own argument is a poor word.
Sure, if there's an 800-pound gorilla in the room that you need to at least mention, identify it in the introduction and say how you're going to support an argument which argues something different. But I would then use the bulk of your paper supporting your thesis rather than addressing every opposing point.
That's kind of what I'm talking about. It's along the lines of, "OK, my thesis is blah blah. However, others have said this and I'm going to admit there are some weak points/controversial views in my argument, but for the most part I'm going to attempt to prove the other guys thesis is weaker. And here's why."Not really that bluntly, but you know what I mean.
If your argument is weak why are you making it in the first place. You should try to present the strongest argument possible.
Not weak, controversial or maybe something that's not cut a dry and I decided to take a side.Herodotus said this but Pausanius contradicts him. I think Pausanius is right because......
It is kind of easy to attack Herodotus since it is generally held that anything he says needs to be corroborated. He is widely considered a biased and untrustworthy source. Ironic, considering he is also called the Father of History.
Not weak, controversial or maybe something that's not cut a dry and I decided to take a side.Herodotus said this but Pausanius contradicts him. I think Pausanius is right because......
You know, I don't think you necessarily have to take a side if you are not convinced that either is totally in the right. A standard paper can be very interesting and informative even if the insight/thesis it pursues is not anywhere near earth-shattering. One approach you may want to try to do in your paper is give synopses of H's argument, P's argument, and then draw up a list of strengths and weaknesses in each approach, and in the end say which one you think has the more convincing argument. You don't have to say which one is right, but rather which argument is better given the evidence you have presented.
That's more or less what I'm talking about (or TRYING to explain). There are some things not so clear cut and I was just asking how you guys handle situations like that. I figure a couple of paragraphs at most (for only an 8-10 pg paper) showing the “other side” would be sufficient and the rest of the paper would be supporting why the side I take is better.I'm getting all this from my rersearch methods books. Basically they say don't be afraid to show the weakenesses or disagreements in your argument, but they didn't really specify how much time should be spent doing this.
No. I'm probably getting way ahead of myself here, I was just thinking more what the author was talking about. IMO, an 8-10 page paper should just get to the point and stay there, and only briefly address the conflicting issues. And the only reason you'd do that is to strengthen your own argument. I believe the author was mainly referring to longer papers or books anyway. Basically what he's saying is do not be afraid to show the opposing viewpoints of your argument. That way you'll be ahead of the game and “ready” when peers or others critique it.
No. I'm probably getting way ahead of myself here, I was just thinking more what the author was talking about. IMO, an 8-10 page paper should just get to the point and stay there, and only briefly address the conflicting issues. And the only reason you'd do that is to strengthen your own argument. I believe the author was mainly referring to longer papers or books anyway. Basically what he's saying is do not be afraid to show the opposing viewpoints of your argument. That way you'll be ahead of the game and "ready" when peers or others critique it.
I might not have explained my last post well enough...I wasn't actually referring to weaknesses in the arguments of Herodotus and Pausanius, not weaknesses in your own argument. Basically, a format such as this is what I am thinking:I. IntroII. Historical background/settingIII. Arguments a) Herodotus' argument b) Pausanius' argumentIV. Analysis of arguments a) Strengths and weaknesses of H's b) Strengths and weaknesses of P'sV. Conclusion a) Answering which argument you think is more convincing and whyWith this kind of format, I don't think you would really need to address major questions about weaknesses about your own conclusion. It would be your opinion, after all. There may be some minor weaknesses that you could mention here if you really wanted. But your role here would be more like an impartial jury that is listening objectively than a crusading journalist who has some far-fetched theory that he is trying to prove. In 8-10 pages, the former kind of paper would be much easier and better-grounded than the latter (IMO).
