Write a short essay of about five double-spaced pages that systematically controverts an officially published opposing argument credited to an author
Using a pattern of refutation, including acknowledgment, accommodation, and refutation, write a short essay of about five double-spaced pages (inclusive of a scrupulously designed MLA style Works Cited page containing a minimum of five reputable sources) that systematically controverts an officially published opposing argument credited to an author (or co-authors). The choice of topic is yours to decide, as long as it is current, is of real interest to you, and avoids being any of the following:
hate-speech and anarchist manifestos;
a cliched, boilerplate controversial issue such as abortion, recycling, death penalty, animal testing, torture, etc.);
a contentious position about a reference source such as a Wikipedia page or a dictionary definition;
a straw-man argument (one that’s obvious weak or falsely portrayed to be weak), such as discounting Flat Earth “theorists,” debating racism, advocating for the rights of the disabled;
an irrelevant debate (e.g., the Roman Empire shouldn’t have conquered and colonized Britain) or an unnecessary speculative “what if” scenario (“Would the world be thrown into chaos if we discovered intelligent alien life?”).
Your topic may be political but doesn’t have to be. Also, it doesn’t have to be of general interest; rather, it can be esoteric and nerdy. It needn’t be of concern solely in the United States, either. The argument you controvert should be written by a credible author and found in a credible source such as a dissertation, an editorial or commentary, a critical blog or review, or a civil ordinance. It should not be taken from a random internet site, or a casual conversation with someone.
In fact, the language of the opposing argument will play an important role in your how you controvert its points, so you will need to quote the source verbatim and directly respond to its authors in their own words. It must also be open to research.
In this next assignment, you’ll perform a very specific sort of comparison-contrast, one that controverts another’s argument or position. “Controvert” means undermining an argument by proving it wrong and asserting your own. Such a process goes by other names, including debate, refutation, disputation, and counterargument. The casebook articles about trigger warnings that you read in Patterns for this unit (Geoffrey R. Stone’s “Free Expression in Peril” and Sophie Downes’s “Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces, and Free Speech, Too”) set a good example for how people who disagree can, in good conscience, controvert one another in a respectful way and continue to search for common ground.
RESEARCH:
Your Works Cited must cite the published work of the author you’re controverting in your essay, but this doesn’t qualify such a source as “research.” Research is that which supports and informs your arguments controverting that author. In other words, regardless of which topic you choose to write about or which authored position you debate, you must assure your readers that your own position is critically supportable. Yes, your own opinions are absolutely crucial to controverting another person’s arguments, but unless you connect those opinions to credible outside voices published in reputable sources, your opinions will quickly started to sound opinionated, which assigns less importance to your opinions being prove, and more importance to them being heard
Furthermore, it’s fine to choose an esoteric, nerdy topic that you’re really into, but bear in mind that it might be so specialized and so new that you won’t find many reputable sources of outside opinion about it. For that reason, you should be prepared to connect such a topic to a broader subject that opens up avenues of credible research: don’t change your topic; just refine the way you support your opinions about it by researching other related topics and subjects.
PITFALLS AND REQUIREMENTS:
You are sternly warned against writing a personal attack of any author or their opinions. Don’t rant. Keep your refutation well reasoned and even-tempered. Don’t stoop to ad hominem arguments nor try to psychoanalyze the author. Your essay should strike the tone of civil debate, not pillory.Avoid shrill language, hyperbole (exaggeration), sensationalism, mendacity, and audacity.
In fact, the tone of this essay should be strictly formal and academic. Besides the pronouns “I,” “me,” and “you” being forbidden, all other informal diction (such a contractions) should be curtailed. Words such as “get” and “thing” are good starting points for this, but other words such as “kids” and “cops” and “super” and “incredibly” etc. will lead to a lowering of your grade this time around. Take extra precautions to proofread and edit for this.
Depending on the sort of topic you choose for this assignment, you mightbe tempted to argue in a very polarizing way. Cable news likes to portray every issue as having two sides, when, in fact, most have multiple sides and nuanced points. In the art of diplomacy, these nuances and multiple viewpoints become common ground for compromise and peaceful agreement—exactly the tone you want to strike in your own debate. Don’t let yourself draw a hard, uncrossable line between “them” and “us.” Rather than belittle your opponent’s ideas, work harder to respect and accommodate them as though you were trying to persuade them to your side. Your readers (and your opponent) will respect this sort of diplomacy.
Answer preview to write a short essay of about five double-spaced pages that systematically controverts an officially published opposing argument credited to an author
MLA
1580 words
