Considering Types

Chiltepinster, "Mocking Bird Argument" 6/26/11 via Wikipedia Commons, Creative Commons License 

In this post I will go over  the different types of arguments that can be made. Specifically, I will be commenting on if I will be using that type of argument, and why it does or does not work with my own purpose, for each type.

Position: A position is otherwise commonly thought of as a pro/con argument, you are using the argument to take a stand one way or the other. These arguments are usually good at capturing the audience through and emotional reaction, as well as putting certain ideas and biases into an audience's head about a subject. 

At risk of jumping the gun, I am already in favor of using a position in my argument. I just find that it is the easiest to use in an opinionated piece, as positions are so inherently opinionated.

Casual: A causal argument aims to focus on the future of the situation or topic at hand. It shows a cause and effect relationship between a problem and a solution, or a problem and a lack of sufficient solution. A causal argument is most helpful when you are trying to be extra dramatic in your position, and you are aiming for your audience to look at the situation and solve it rationally.

A causal argument might have worked for me, and I might still use pieces of causal arguments. However, a position works better for my purpose, seeing as I don't want people to look at the situation completely rationally, I want to invoke talk, controversy, and emotion among readers.

Evaluative: An evaluative argument can be either the least or the most argumentative and emotional of the types. It goes in depth on how successful something in a controversy is, such as a policy. An evaluative argument is like an objective version of a position, it shows the current state without necessarily taking a stance on it.

Evaluative arguments won't work for my sake, as I need to stir up that emotion, and the present situation is less important to me than how the situation is presented to the audience in an interesting way.

Proposal: A proposal asks its readers to take a stand on the argument. For instance, if the argument was feeding the poor and hungry in other countries, the proposal might be to donate money. If the argument was red light cameras being banned in tucson, the proposal is to have a vote on them being banned. 

For my purpose, a proposal is not important. I don't care which side my audience chooses, even though I am offering an opinionated position. All I want is for my audience to gain some interest in neuroscience controversies.

Refutation: A refutation looks at a current or previous argument and offers the opposing side to that argument. It shows all the ways in which that argument may be wrong, and in its own way takes a side or position on a subject. 

While I may refer to and refute some past articles or facts, there is not one specific argument that I want to focus on opposing for my own argument, which is why a refutation wouldn't work for the sake of my argumentative piece.


Reflection: I looked at Clay (Rhetorical Action Plan) and Mark's (Rhetorical Action Plan, Considering Types) posts in order to see how others were addressing making plans for there posts, and to reflect upon my own. I discovered that, when considering types and my action plan, I had been sort of narrow-minded and set on how I wanted my argument to be presented, just as it appeared others struggled with. I think that I will still go with my same plan and type of argument, as I think a position is what will be best for an emotional buzzfeed article, but analyzing others' plans has helped me to better realize how I can go about structuring the position in an interesting way.