.
Elements of an argument
Contention: The main point of view or opinion the writer is wanting to convey to the reader. This is explored through a range of key arguments each of which will be supported by a claim.
Key argument: A key message that a writer wants to convey to the readers to support their contention. The writer will use of range of key arguments to support their contention. The writer will use language and evidence to try to persuade you to a particular point of view.
Claims: The key points of the argument. Each key argument should have a central claim. This is often presented as the topic sentence for the key argument.
Evidence: information that an author weaves into the writing in order to substantiate claims. Supports the claims and arguments and can include support for the claim, such as examples, statistics, quotes etc. In academic writing, evidence used from other sources must be referenced
- Strong evidence: Sufficient evidence, high quality evidence.
- Weak evidence (e.g., anecdotal evidence): Insufficient evidence, poor quality evidence.
Assumption: Information the writer believes the readers will already know. Assumptions are embedded in the arguments. They are seldom explicit and therefore can be difficult to identify.
Language: The deliberate choice of words to influence or to elicit a response.
Contention
- Key argument
- Claim
- Evidence
- Weak
- Strong
- Assumption
- Language
Contention: The main point of view or opinion the writer is wanting to convey to the reader. Usually supported by the claims.
An author’s contention is the main claim they’re trying to prove throughout their article.
- Placing their contention at the beginning is the most direct method, and has the effect of positioning the reader to the author’s beliefs from the outset.
- A contention placed at the end of an article can have the effect of seeming like a valid, logical conclusion to a well-thought through discussion.
- The contention can also be repeated throughout the article. The author may have chosen to present it in this way in order to continue reiterating their main point in the audience’s minds, aligning them to their views.
Case study: The Australian Banking Sector
Introduction
The global financial crisis of 2007 (GFC), was a severe worldwide economic crisis so severe that is was labelled as the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Yet many economists argue that the problem could have been avoided, if ideologues supporting the economics models of the time weren’t so vocal, influential and inconsiderate of others’ viewpoints and concerns. As the negative consequences of the GFC unfolded in Australia, key influencers demanded that lessons be learned so as to minimise the risk of such events occurring in the future. Key critics are concerned that, despite calls from key regulatory agencies for rapid and widespread change to offset the risk of a future financial crisis, little has changed leaving the Australian finance sector vulnerable to future economic collapse.
Argument: A key message that a writer wants to convey to the readers to support their contention. The writer will use of range of key arguments to support their contention. The writer will use language and evidence to try to persuade you to a particular point of view.
Having determined the contention of the overall argument you are making, you will need to identify key arguments (can be called sub-arguments) to support the overall contention of the article. This argument should take a strong stance so readers understand exactly what your claim is.
Finding the argument
The global financial crisis of 2007 (GFC), was a severe worldwide economic crisis so severe that is was labelled as the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Yet many economists argue that the problem could have been avoided, if ideologues supporting the economics models of the time weren’t so vocal, influential and inconsiderate of others’ viewpoints and concerns. As the negative consequences of the GFC unfolded in Australia, key influencers demanded that lessons be learned so as to minimise the risk of such events occurring in the future. Key critics are concerned that, despite calls from key regulatory agencies for rapid and widespread change to offset the risk of a future financial crisis, little has changed leaving the Australian finance sector vulnerable to future economic collapse.
The need for change
The global financial crisis (GFC) of 2007 rocked the global banking and financial sectors however, the lessons learned from the GFC have not heeded by the Australian Banking Sector. The 2007 GFG witnessed the loss of trillions of dollars from banking and finance sectors worldwide resulting in the collapse of banks, economies and devastating the personal lives of millions (Montague et. al. 2016). We have all been affected by this collapse yet, despite this state of destruction, with over 70 inquiries or reviews into related aspects of the Australian financial services industry since 2007, little has changed to ensure better protection for the Australian financial section (Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) (www.apra.gov.au). Australia has a limited number of large banks on a comparative global scale but all are well capitalised and underpinned by a robust retail base, developed capabilities in regard to wealth management and fully serviced activities in trade finance and commercial and corporate advisory infrastructure impacting on the South East Asian Region (Austrade, 2011). However, the reputations of the Australian banks are tarnished too as they have harmed many clients who followed what they considered to be professional and ethical advice.
Claims (topic sentence): The key points of the argument. Each key argument should have a central claim. This is often presented as the topic sentence for the key argument.
A Claim is a statement asserted within the argument that can be assessed to be true or false.
- Each claim can be supported by a number of sub claims, arguments or evidence.
- The claim may contain additional contextual material, for example explaining terms used and scope.
Finding the claim
The global financial crisis of 2007 (GFC), was a severe worldwide economic crisis so severe that is was labelled as the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Yet many economists argue that the problem could have been avoided, if ideologues supporting the economics models of the time weren’t so vocal, influential and inconsiderate of others’ viewpoints and concerns. As the negative consequences of the GFC unfolded in Australia, key influencers demanded that lessons be learned so as to minimise the risk of such events occurring in the future. Key critics are concerned that, despite calls from key regulatory agencies for rapid and widespread change to offset the risk of a future financial crisis, little has changed leaving the Australian finance sector vulnerable to future economic collapse.
The need for change
The global financial crisis (GFC) of 2007 rocked the global banking and financial sectors however, the lessons learned from the GFC have not heeded by the Australian Banking Sector. The 2007 GFG witnessed the loss of trillions of dollars from banking and finance sectors worldwide resulting in the collapse of banks, economies and devastating the personal lives of millions (Montague et. al. 2016). We have all been affected by this collapse yet, despite this state of destruction, with over 70 inquiries or reviews into related aspects of the Australian financial services industry since 2007, little has changed to ensure better protection for the Australian financial section (Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) (www.apra.gov.au). Australia has a limited number of large banks on a comparative global scale but all are well capitalised and underpinned by a robust retail base, developed capabilities in regard to wealth management and fully serviced activities in trade finance and commercial and corporate advisory infrastructure impacting on the South East Asian Region (Austrade, 2011). However, the reputations of the Australian banks are tarnished too as they have harmed many clients who followed what they considered to be professional and ethical advice.
Evidence: information that an author weaves into the writing in order to substantiate claims. Supports the claims and arguments and can include support for the claim, such as examples, statistics, quotes etc. In academic writing, evidence used from other sources must be referenced.
Evidence is being presented in support of the claim and argument. All evidence provides some level of relevance. Always analyse the quality of each piece of evidence being presented to you as the reader. You need to be able to determine the quality of evidence as being strong or weak. Also consider whether the writer adequately presents evidence that contradicts their argument. This can indicate a writer that is present a balanced perspective.
- Strong evidence: Sufficient evidence, high quality evidence.
- Weak evidence: Insufficient evidence, poor quality evidence.
A contention needs to be supported by relevant, reliable, credible, sufficient and current evidence.
If there is no evidence, it isn’t an argument - it is only an opinion, a description, or an explanation.
Question the evidence the author has used.
- Does the evidence provided support the argument?
- How credible (trustworthy) is the evidence?
- Has enough evidence been presented?
- Does it come from different sources?
- Are there any missing links between the evidence and the author’s contention?
- Is the evidence current?
- Is there other evidence available that might challenge the evidence used?
Take notice of linking words and phrases which demonstrate cause/reason, effect/results, to help identify the evidence used to support the argument.
Finding the evidence. Determining if the evidence is weak or strong
The global financial crisis of 2007 (GFC), was a severe worldwide economic crisis so severe that is was labelled as the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Yet many economists argue that the problem could have been avoided, if ideologues supporting the economics models of the time weren’t so vocal, influential and inconsiderate of others’ viewpoints and concerns. As the negative consequences of the GFC unfolded in Australia, key influencers demanded that lessons be learned so as to minimise the risk of such events occurring in the future. Key critics are concerned that, despite calls from key regulatory agencies for rapid and widespread change to offset the risk of a future financial crisis, little has changed leaving the Australian finance sector vulnerable to future economic collapse.
The need for change
The global financial crisis (GFC) of 2007 rocked the global banking and financial sectors however, the lessons learned from the GFC have not heeded by the Australian Banking Sector. The 2007 GFG witnessed the loss of trillions of dollars from banking and finance sectors worldwide resulting in the collapse of banks, economies and devastating the personal lives of millions (Montague et. al. 2016). We have all been affected by this collapse yet, despite this state of destruction, with over 70 inquiries or reviews into related aspects of the Australian financial services industry since 2007, little has changed to ensure better protection for the Australian financial section (Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) (www.apra.gov.au). Australia has a limited number of large banks on a comparative global scale but all are well capitalised and underpinned by a robust retail base, developed capabilities in regard to wealth management and fully serviced activities in trade finance and commercial and corporate advisory infrastructure impacting on the South East Asian Region (Austrade, 2011). However, the reputations of the Australian banks are tarnished too as they have harmed many clients who followed what they considered to be professional and ethical advice.
Assumption: Information the writer believes the readers will already know. Assumptions are embedded in the arguments. They are seldom explicit and therefore can be difficult to identify.
Sometimes we assume the answer or reason we have given is ‘obvious’ or ‘common sense’. This is because we believe (often incorrectly) that other people think and feel the same as we do. Assumptions come from our personal beliefs and values; they may be justified, or not. Often assumptions are also unstated or ‘hidden’ because the writer feels it is unnecessary to explain.
Weak or false arguments are based on incorrect assumptions and are not well-supported by credible evidence.
Finding the assumptions
The global financial crisis of 2007 (GFC), was a severe worldwide economic crisis so severe that is was labelled as the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Yet many economists argue that the problem could have been avoided, if ideologues supporting the economics models of the time weren’t so vocal, influential and inconsiderate of others’ viewpoints and concerns. As the negative consequences of the GFC unfolded in Australia, key influencers demanded that lessons be learned so as to minimise the risk of such events occurring in the future. Key critics are concerned that, despite calls from key regulatory agencies for rapid and widespread change to offset the risk of a future financial crisis, little has changed leaving the Australian finance sector vulnerable to future economic collapse.
The need for change
The global financial crisis (GFC) of 2007 rocked the global banking and financial sectors however, the lessons learned from the GFC have not heeded by the Australian Banking Sector. The 2007 GFG witnessed the loss of trillions of dollars from banking and finance sectors worldwide resulting in the collapse of banks, economies and devastating the personal lives of millions (Montague et. al. 2016). We have all been affected by this collapse yet, despite this state of destruction, with over 70 inquiries or reviews into related aspects of the Australian financial services industry since 2007, little has changed to ensure better protection for the Australian financial section (APRA, www.apra.gov.au). Australia has a limited number of large banks on a comparative global scale but all are well capitalised and underpinned by a robust retail base, developed capabilities in regard to wealth management and fully serviced activities in trade finance and commercial and corporate advisory infrastructure impacting on the South East Asian Region (Austrade, 2011). However, the reputations of the Australian banks are tarnished too as they have harmed many clients who followed what they considered to be professional and ethical advice.
Language: The deliberate choice of words to influence or to trigger a response.
This refers to a range of different persuasive language techniques used by writers in their texts to trigger a particular effect on the reader.
Persuasive language includes:
Ridicule, attacks: The writer attacks an opponent or idea. This is an assertion of the writer's viewpoint, and is used to prove the writers point by using attacking and putting down persuasion techniques against the opponent or idea. These methods are often effective in placing the reader in a position of agreement with the writer.
Emotional language: (key emotional words are emphasised): Words used to deliberately create an emotional impact or response from the audience. The effect of using emotive language as a persuasive technique is to appeal to people’s emotions and trigger an emotional response.
Hyperbole: A hyperbole is an extreme exaggeration used to make a point for emphasis. They are not meant to be taken literally. By using a hyperbole, a story can quickly become interesting or sound more convincing. Hyperboles are comparisons, but are exaggerated and often ridiculous.
Finding the use of persuasive language
The global financial crisis of 2007 (GFC), was a severe worldwide economic crisis so severe that is was labelled as the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression. Yet many economists argue that the problem could have been avoided, if ideologues supporting the economics models of the time weren’t so vocal, influential and inconsiderate of others’ viewpoints and concerns. As the negative consequences of the GFC unfolded in Australia, key influencers demanded that lessons be learned so as to minimise the risk of such events occurring in the future. Key critics are concerned that, despite calls from key regulatory agencies for rapid and widespread change to offset the risk of a future financial crisis, little has changed leaving the Australian finance sector vulnerable to future economic collapse.
The need for change
The global financial crisis (GFC) of 2007 rocked the global banking and financial sectors however, the lessons learned from the GFC have not heeded by the Australian Banking Sector. The 2007 GFG witnessed the loss of trillions of dollars from banking and finance sectors worldwide resulting in the collapse of banks, economies and devastating the personal lives of millions (Montague et. al. 2016). We have all been affected by this collapse yet, despite this state of destruction, with over 70 inquiries or reviews into related aspects of the Australian financial services industry since 2007, little has changed to ensure better protection for the Australian financial section (APRA, www.apra.gov.au). Australia has a limited number of large banks on a comparative global scale but all are well capitalised and underpinned by a robust retail base, developed capabilities in regard to wealth management and fully serviced activities in trade finance and commercial and corporate advisory infrastructure impacting on the South East Asian Region (Austrade, 2011). However, the reputations of the Australian banks are tarnished too as they have harmed many clients who followed what they considered to be professional and ethical advice.