Logical Essays
Strategy
€ Choose a controversial issue. Don't write about how murder is wrong. That stand isn't controversial because most people would agree with you. However, asserting that police need to be able to torture people in certain situations (to force them to reveal the location of a bomb) is taking a controversial stand.
€ Choose one side. Don't fence-straddle. Don't conclude with, "Well, I'm not sure what I believe. Both sides seem to have some good points." The purpose of a persuasive essay is to persuade someone. You do that by taking a clear and strong stand.
€ Use concession. Even though you must choose one side, you will persuade more effectively if you concede some points to your opponent rather than knock down each and every one of your opponent's points. Why?
--because you want to persuade those who disagree with you and not turn them off;
--because you want to appear fair and unbiased;
--because you want to encourage them to read your essay;
--because, by showing them how you changed your mind, you are showing them the steps toward their change of position.
€ Don't insult your opponents or condescend toward them. Again, you don't want to turn off the very people you hope to persuade.
€ In making your arguments
--make sure you have the last word
--prewrite by making a pro/con chart
--attack the assumptions behind your opponents' arguments. For instance, anti-abortionists claim that abortion is immoral because it is the taking away of a human life. Don't attack that position by claiming that a woman has the right of choice. Instead, attack the assumption that a two-week old fetus is a human life. Is it life? Perhaps in the same way your finger is alive. Is it human? Where is the evidence?
Similarly, if a pro-abortionist claims that a woman has the right to decide what to do with her own body, attack the assumption behind that argument. Do any of us have the right to commit suicide? Does a pregnant woman have the right to take drugs and poison her child? Once a child is born, does the parent have the right to kill him or her? Isn't is still "flesh of my flesh"?
structural options (your side is always "pro")
¶1 Intro: list cons 123 ¶1 Con A ¶1 Con/Pro A
¶2 Con/Pro 1 ¶2 Con B ¶2 Con/Pro B
¶3 Con/Pro 2 ¶3 Pro A ¶3 Con/Pro C
¶4 Con/Pro 3 ¶4 Pro B ¶4 Con/Pro D
¶5 Resolution (Pro) ¶5 Resolution (Pro) ¶5 Resolution (Pro)
Emotional Essays
Strategy
--tell a dramatic story
--Use loaded language (a murdering mother who tears the innocent child from the safety of its womb denies the muted screams of her dying child as it is surgically vacuumed and spat out)
--ignore the legitimate positions of your opponents/deal with only the arguments you can attack
--end with a call to action
--show how you changed your mind (turnaround)
Optional Structures
¶'s 1-2: Tell your story ¶1 general intro
¶3 Con ¶2 tell your story
¶4 Pro ¶3 pro
¶5 Resolution Pro ¶4 con
¶5 pro/resolution
Ethical Essays
In a persuasive essay that appeals to ethics, you must appeal to a higher authority. If you are a doctor, you may appeal to the code of ethics all doctors must abide by. If you are a lawyer, you may appeal to a lawyer's code of ethics. For most of us however, we are governed by more than merely legislated laws. We govern ourselves by some moral code.
That moral code is dependent upon the notion that people have value, no matter where that value comes from. A secular humanist believes that people are valuable because people are valuable. They deny the existence of God and hold that we must preserve human life because of its intrinsic value. Fundamentalists would disagree. They would claim that God created us, therefore we all have value and must treat each other as valuable. Below I've summarized some basic philosophical notions.
Fundamentalism
We know what is right and wrong because God has set down his laws in the Bible. Theologians (priests and ministers) interpret these laws and tell us how to live. Suicide is always wrong because it says so in the Bible.
Natural Law
We know what is right and wrong because of our conscience and the Bible. All cultures have laws against murder and rape. Why? Because God has given us an intrinsic moral code in addition to his written code. Suicide is always wrong because the collective consciences of all cultures have agreed to this.
Situational Ethics
We know what is right and wrong by judging what is most loving. Because God is love, we must follow the laws of love and love God, our neighbors, and ourselves. For a prisoner of war who feels he may reveal military secrets if tortured, suicide may be the most loving action if it saves the lives of his comrades.
Secular Humanism
We know what is right and wrong by judging what best preserves our human dignity. That dignity, that worth, is inherent in our beings and does not come from any god. There are two paths humanists follow from here:
A: One life is as precious as a thousand lives. The soldier in the previous example should not commit suicide because his single life is as valuable as the tens of lives his suicide would save.
B: One life is not as precious as two lives. The soldier should commit suicide because by doing so he is saving many lives.
Hedonism
We know what is right and wrong by judging what offers us the most pleasure. If suicide is pleasurable, then go ahead and do it. Hedonists also split into two main camps: those who encourage people to enjoy life as long as they don't hurt others, and those who encourage people to enjoy life even if it means hurting others.
Survivalism
We know what is right and wrong by judging what preserves our lives. Nothing has value except our own selves and, because they are an extension of ourselves, our families as well. Kill to survive. Commit suicide at no cost. Kill your own family if you need to survive.
If you write an essay which appeals to an ethical principal, you may wish to name the ethical standard you are using. If you write that abortion is immoral because it takes away a human life, then you may wish to note that human life is valuable because a) God (through the Bible) says so, b) our conscience says so, c) preserving human life is the most loving thing to do in most situations, or d) humans are intrinsically valuable.
Suggestions for structure
¶1 Intro ¶1 Intro (123)
¶2 Story (expo & conflict) ¶2 con/pro 1
¶3 Story (crisis & climax) ¶3 con/pro 2
¶4 Ethical analysis con/pro ¶4 con/pro 3
¶5 Resolution (pro) ¶5 resolution (pro)
Sample Topics
Abortion, gun control, drug legalization, capital punishment, drinking age, banning smoking from the workplace or school, school dress codes, appropriate punishments for students, classes that should be taught, classes that shouldn't be taught, harsh prison terms for certain crimes, legalizing torture in extreme cases, aid to foreign countries, immigration to US, downtown ball park, legalizing insider trading on Wall Street, marriage of priests, ordination of women, independence from Rome for bishops and congregations, SI remaining coed, any policy at SI you don't like, any rule that applies to you that you don't like, mandatory drug testing, mandatory AIDS testing, hiring of homosexuals as teachers, passive/active euthanasia, right-to-die, how federal dollars should be spent, how school monies should be spent. . .
Return to Writing Guidelines Page