Using Frameworks for Arguments

In this chapter, you will learn about several common frameworks for organizing a written argument. All of these frameworks are compatible with a closed-form essay structure, which includes an explicit thesis statement, paragraphs organized with topic sentences, and an introduction and conclusion.

The frameworks incorporate two main elements:

Affirmative Arguments: Direct support for your central claim or thesis.
Rebuttal Arguments: Responses to potential opposing views or counterarguments.

While these are well-established frameworks, remember that you can deviate from them or combine elements as needed. While having a guiding framework is valuable, especially early in your writing development, the most persuasive arguments often move fluidly between different frameworks based on the specific rhetorical context. The frameworks simply provide a proven structure to ensure your argument is coherent, complete, and strategically organized.

Another important note to remember is that these frameworks can expand or contract to suit any length of argument. Early in your academic career, you’ll mostly write short essays that have 1-2 paragraphs of introduction, 3-5 body paragraphs, and another 1-2 paragraphs of conclusion, but it’s possible to expand these frameworks for different lengths of essay – or to even longer works, like books!

Traditional Classical Argument

The traditional classical structure of an argument is based on how the ancient Greeks and Romans structured their arguments, which they would have presented orally. It’s a pretty basic structure, and you’ll often see it used for short arguments, like those presented in editorials.

Introduction

• • • Follows closed-form introduction structure
    • Closes with a thesis statement that presents the claim

Affirmative Section

• • • Made up of multiple paragraphs; the “main” section of the essay
    • Each paragraph opens with an explicit topic sentence that states a reason to support the claim
    • Each paragraph supports the reason with grounds, warrant, and backing as needed

Rebuttal Section

• • • One or more paragraphs, but typically shorter than the previous section
    • Identifies and responds to opposing views/conditions of rebuttal

Conclusion

• • • Follows closed-form conclusion structure
    • Most traditionally, includes a call to action

Modified Classical Argument

The modified version changes where the responses to opposing views appear. Rather than saving all of the rebuttal arguments for the end, you address those opposing views as they are relevant to each line of argument. You may also have a paragraph prior to the conclusion where you address opposing views that do not directly relate to a specific line of argument. This version is useful because it allows you a bit more room to respond to opposing views, and you don’t have to hope your audience ignores their doubts and questions until the end of the essay – you can address them immediately.

Introduction

• • • Follows closed-form introduction structure
    • Closes with a thesis statement that presents the claim

Affirmative/Rebuttal Section

• • • Made up of multiple paragraphs; the “main” section of the essay
    • Each paragraph opens with an explicit topic sentence that states a reason to support the claim
    • Each paragraph supports the reason with grounds, warrant, and backing as needed
    • Each paragraph identifies and responds to the conditions of rebuttal related to the reason and/or warrant for that paragraph

Optional Rebuttal Section

• • • If present, one or more paragraphs, but typically shorter than the previous section
    • Identifies and responds to opposing views that were not tied to the previous lines of argument, and therefore not addressed in the main body

Conclusion

• • • Follows closed-form conclusion structure

Classical Refutation

You would most likely use this structure when your claim is directly focused on arguing that some other view is incorrect (known as making a negative argument), but you are not particularly interested in supporting any affirmative views. For example, you might argue that raising the minimum wage will not increase prices and focus exclusively on refuting the various arguments people have made claiming that raising the minimum wage will increase prices.

Introduction

• • • Follows closed-form introduction structure
    • Closes with a thesis statement that presents the claim (which will be an assertion that a particular view is incorrect)

Rebuttal Section

• • • Made up of multiple paragraphs; the “main” section of the essay
    • Each paragraph opens with an explicit topic sentence that rebuts a particular supporting reason for the opposing view
    • Each paragraph provides refutations of grounds, warrants, and/or backing for opposing view

Conclusion

• • • Follows closed-form conclusion structure

Surprising Reversal

The surprising reversal makes sense when you know the audience doesn’t believe your claim, but that’s only because they are misinformed in some way. The general assumption is that the audience, though incorrect, is not strongly attached to their incorrect view.

Introduction

• • • Follows closed-form introduction structure to establish topic, significance, and context
    • Does NOT include the thesis statement

Popular View Section

• • • Usually brief
    • Explains the common but misinformed view on the issue

Thesis

• • • May appear at end of previous section or beginning of next section, or as its own paragraph (depending on what makes the most sense in context)
    • Establishes the claim that will be supported in the remainder of the essay; the claim may be affirmative or negative

Affirmative/Rebuttal Section

• • • Made up of multiple paragraphs; the “main” section of the essay
    • Presents affirmative and/or rebuttal arguments as needed to support the claim

Conclusion

• • • Follows closed-form conclusion structure

Dialogic

When your audience is likely to be more skeptical of your claim, a dialogic argument may be a better option. In this kind of argument, you first explore the strengths of various perspectives on the topic without taking a clear position of your own. Only later in the essay do you reveal your claim and then offer support for it. Organizing your argument in this way allows you to demonstrate to the audience that you are carefully considering and respectful of other positions on the issue.

Introduction

• • • Follows closed-form introduction structure to establish topic, significance, and context
    • Does NOT include the thesis statement

Background Section

• • • Often a lengthy section, around half (or more) of the total length of the essay
    • Explores multiple perspectives on the topic, establishing the value of each

Thesis

• • • May appear at end of previous section or beginning of next section, or as its own paragraph (depending on what makes the most sense in context)
    • Establishes the claim that will be supported in the remainder of the essay

Affirmative/Rebuttal Section

• • • Presents affirmative and/or rebuttal arguments as needed to support the claim

Conclusion

• • • Follows closed-form conclusion structure

Rogerian

Rogerian argument, named after the psychologist Carl Rogers, who developed “active listening,” is the model for the most resistant audience, and it’s the most unusual framework. In fact, many people object to calling it a type of “argument” at all because of how it emphasizes finding common ground and making compromises. When you write a Rogerian argument, not only do you hope the audience shifts a bit, but you as the writer must also be willing to shift your own view.

Introduction

• • • Follows closed-form introduction structure to establish topic, significance, and context
    • Does NOT include the thesis statement

Audience View Section

• • • Summarizes the audience’s view accurately and sympathetically

Common Ground Section

• • • Establishes areas of agreement and shared values between writer and audience

Writer’s Views Section

• • • Presents points that complicate or challenge the audience’s view
    • Focuses on how these points prevent the writer from completely accepting the audience’s view

Conclusion

• • • Presents thesis/claim, which typically is a synthesis or compromise between the audience view and the writer’s view