In module two we discussed how narration, the telling of stories, is perhaps the most typical way that humans interact with language and so is probably the most comfortable mode of writing for many because it comes so “naturally” to us. We also considered perspective when we talked about storytelling; every person approaches the world from a certain point-of-view, and the words he or she uses to express that position both construct that perspective (after all, language is the vehicle for our thoughts) and reveal it to others. When we tell stories, we invite others to experience our point-of-view and to empathize with our perspective. In other words, language serves as the great connective tissue that allows us to commune together and build understanding.

And yet, even as language pulls us together, the singular nature of perspective pulls us apart. Though we share the world, each of us only truly experiences it from our specific position, and it’s impossible for us to truly inhabit another person’s point-of-view (that’s why language is necessary in the first place!). This distance can lead to misunderstandings, especially because our words can be interpreted in a variety of ways that we can’t control.

Moreover, we are not simply communicating beings that forge communities; we are also physical bodies struggling to survive and competing for resources. When that struggle intensifies, our singular perspective focuses more and more on self-preservation. In the direst of such circumstances, physical conflict and violence erupt as we act on the world in order to defend our place in it. Even when overt physical conflict can be avoided, communication becomes difficult under duress because our perspective is in jeopardy; though we often are quick to express how we feel about important issues that affect our well-being and are desperate for others to understand our position, we are less likely to listen to others when we fear for our survival. In these moments we wield our words like weapons; we shout for our space and refuse to acknowledge the perspectives of others whom we now perceive as threats rather than fellow storytellers.

In these moments it’s easy to forget that each and every one of us has survived thanks largely to a community forged on language and mutual understanding. Human infants must be nurtured, for we cannot fend for ourselves in our early years. Thanks to the cooperation that language has afforded us, we have built societies where successful child rearing, though always difficult and never perfect, is commonplace. In other words, our perspectives that contest for survival are themselves indebted to the negotiation, cooperation, and compromises language allowed our forebears to make. When we lash out without discussion or deliberation, emphasizing our individual power at the expense of others, we forget our communal roots and risk everything. When language breaks down, society is at risk. When society is at risk, human survival in general is jeopardized. However, as mortal beings we live in danger and seek self-preservation, often at the expense of others. How can we reconcile these uncomfortable truths?

An absolute reconciliation is impossible, for existence costs and sometimes survival instincts override our best intentions. However, for the sake of the human species, and in the honor of those who have built the cultures and institutions that we inhabit (and due to which we persist), we must not abandon our responsibility to communicate. This module will explain just how that responsibility takes shape in a specific kind of writing: argumentation.

Argumentation means taking a position on a social or political issue while directly engaging other points of view. Of all the writing types we’ve encountered so far, this one is perhaps the most difficult because it requires that we detach from our primordial desire to overcome obstacles by using force. In other words, though writing an argument, like all writing, expresses an author’s perspective and in some sense imposes that perspective on an audience, it also requires that the author directly entertain perspectives other than his or her own in order to build community. This is as difficult as it is uncomfortable, for it requires not only that we explain why we believe something (and often we have trouble establishing our own reasons for thinking a certain way!) but also that we understand why someone else believes otherwise.

In addition, once we have considered what others think and why, effective argumentation requires that we figure out what kinds of examples might build consensus for our perspective. When we are arguing about important social and political issues, it is often not enough to merely explain our own personal experiences as evidence for our beliefs. Thus, argumentative writing also entails documenting outside sources to augment one’s position and persuade readers to agree. This module will discuss some of the kinds of evidence that are most convincing; the next module will focus on exactly how to present that evidence in a paper.

Module Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this module, the student will be able to:

1. Identify the characteristics of argumentation, including the interplay between logic and emotion.
2. Identify enthusiastic, undecided, and contentious audiences and how each shapes a writer’s argument.
3. Identify the importance of integrating an opposing viewpoint as a persuasive tactic.
4. Identify the kinds of evidence used to support the reasons that explain an argumentative thesis.
5. Identify fallacies, including ad hominem attacks, either or arguments, post hoc fallacies, and hasty and sweeping generalizations.
6. Use correct grammar, syntax, and diction in writing a comparison or contrast essay.