Good Arguments

The more we dive into the topic of making a good, solid, argument in writing, the more my perspective changes on what it means for an argument to be "good." First and foremost, I have come to the realization that convincing a reader is only a very small aspect of creating a solid argument.

In high school, we were taught to find facts that backed up our point, and use them to convince our reader. Then we would move on to address one point of the opposition. Now I see how extremely limited, and narrow-minded this idea is when it comes to entering an academic conversation. The idea in our readings that differs from high school so greatly, is the fact that we must really focus on being ethical within our argumentation. Instead of writing to simply convince someone, we should really focus on, and acknowledge other valid points of view that present themselves within our argument. It is more important to really inform people and add accuracy to a conversation rather than to choose a side and claim that anything else is wrong. As we read in Finding the Good Argument OR Why Bother With Logic, we realize that we have been taught to argue in a defensive, battle like way. To create an argument outside of this mindset would greatly expand our writing and ability to argue effectively.

Finally, I really love the idea of the good balance of logos, pathos, and ethos as a check in argumentative writing. It helps me understand each piece of my argument and how I can further develop it with facts, emotions, and through establishing my own credibility. One thing that I am still hung up on when it comes to the vocabulary we have been looking at is epistemology. I am not quite sure how to evaluate and articulate how people seem to "know what they know," in writing and in our conversations as a whole.