Paragraph Structure for Argumentation

As covered in the section Paragraph Basics, fully developed paragraphs have some common components, but eventually writers will need to customize each of their paragraphs based on the various needs of the subject, audience, and purpose. But argumentation is a common purpose in college, and such paragraphs have their own common components, slightly different from the basic paragraph. Essentially, what follows is a version of the basic paragraph customized for conveying academic arguments. (For more information, see the section Rhetoric and Argumentation.)

But as you learn this, note that the order of these elements can change as needed, as can the approaches to each of these elements.

Paragraph Structure for Argumentation:

1. Claim: State the main point, or the position you are taking on the subject.
   1. Be deliberate and precise in your choice of terms, even if they will need explanation below.
   2. The Claim can be extended by adding on a reason using a “because” clause.
2. Support: State the reasons for your claim, and offer any necessary clarifying information.
   1. Stay focused on the Claim, even when introducing new details.
   2. A common strategy is to discuss causes or effects related to the Claim.
   3. Don’t assume that your reader automatically agrees with your statements.
3. Evidence: Provide information from external references and sources to demonstrate the validity of your Claim and Support.
   1. Don’t use unprofessional or questionable sources. Instead, rely on evidence from legitimate, authoritative, or commonly accepted experts, publishers, and institutions.
   2. Cite your sources correctly.
   3. Explain how the evidence relates to the Claim and Support as necessary.
4. Acknowledgment: Address reasonable opposition to the ideas you state above.
   1. Anticipate what other perspectives or weaknesses a critical thinker might be able to find in your ideas.
   2. Consider using research to find the best available opposing ideas.
   3. Don’t assume that your interpretation of the evidence is the only valid possibility. Instead, state an opposing interpretation.
   4. Don’t address unreasonable, exaggerated, or easily defeated opposition. This poor strategy is often called “the straw-man fallacy.”
5. Rebuttal: Defend your ideas against the Acknowledgment.
   1. Don’t forget this part. A common error is to end on Acknowledgment, which creates contradiction and confusion.
   2. Don’t get aggressive or bombastic. Remain focused, reasonable, and professional.
   3. Consider using sources again as needed.
   4. Admit to your weaknesses with honesty if the opposition is too solid to rebut directly, but end on a strong defense of your ideas regardless. And remember that the best defense is a clear expression of good ideas.

Examples:

Below are examples of the argumentation paragraph in use, followed by analysis of the components:

Claim: “TV violence can have harmful psychological effects on children because those exposed to lots of it tend to adopt the values of what they see.”

Support: “Their constant exposure to violent images makes them unable to distinguish fantasy from reality.”

Evidence: “Smith found that children ages of 5-7 who watched more than three hours of violent television a day were 25 percent more likely to say what they saw on television was ‘really happening’ (214).”

Acknowledgment: “Of course, some children who watch more violent entertainment might already be attracted to violence. ”

Rebuttal: “But Jones found that ‘children with no predisposition to violence were as attracted to violent images as those with a violent history’ (12).”