Entering into a discussion, we always use the appropriate situation, a certain strategy, sometimes without even thinking about it. Consider the practical methods of argumentation and expressing one's own position: various tips, tried and tested methods, as well as typical mistakes that can occur during negotiations and prevent the successful completion of the discussion.
We all negotiate every day: with friends, work colleagues, acquaintances. Most of the time we don't even realize we're doing it because it's a daily activity. Entering into a discussion, we always use the appropriate situation, a certain strategy, sometimes without even thinking about it.
For some people, the very fact that the business they are about to undertake is called "negotiation" makes them nervous and anxious. However, it is possible to develop an “immunity” to negotiations as a normal and everyday affair. The following are practical techniques for arguing and expressing one's own position: various tips, tried and tested methods. This list can be supplemented with the accumulation of communicative experience.
Argumentation Tactics
1. Installation in relation to a partner should be not only friendly, but not self-centered. Only with mutual respect and consideration of each other's interests will communication be truly partnership based on mutual respect and consideration of each other's interests. Egocentrism prevents this, not allowing a person to change the angle of view when perceiving and evaluating events, to see them from different angles and in their entirety. It forces a person to act in his "coordinate system", to approach the partner's statements with his own yardstick, to interpret the information coming from him in a favorable light for himself. The position of a person who communicates in this manner cannot be called objective, and his arguments cannot be called convincing.
2. You should be respectful of the interlocutor and his position, even if it is unacceptable. Nothing has such a destructive effect on communication as the arrogant and dismissive attitude of partners towards each other. If, in response to his argument, the partner catches a note of irony or contempt in the speech of the opponent, then one can hardly count on a favorable outcome of the conversation.
3. Argumentation should be conducted "on the field" of the interlocutor, that is, work directly with his arguments. Demonstrating their failure or the undesirable consequences of their adoption, one should put forward one's own, more acceptable in the interests of the common cause. This will give a better effect than repeating your own arguments multiple times.
4. To convince a partner is easier for a convinced person. Defending your point of view, you can quickly influence the interlocutor. In this case, in addition to the logic that affects the rational layers of the psyche, the mechanism of emotional infection is activated. Fascinated by his idea, a person speaks emotionally and figuratively, which plays an important role in persuasion. Thus, the appeal not only to the mind, but also to the heart of the interlocutor gives a result. However, excessive emotionality, indicating a lack of logical argumentation, can cause a rebuff from the opponent.
5. Excitement and excitement during persuasion are interpreted as the uncertainty of the persuasive, and therefore reduce the effectiveness of the argument. Outbursts of anger, shouting, scolding cause a negative reaction of the interlocutor, forcing him to defend himself. The best means are courtesy, diplomacy, tact. But at the same time, politeness should not turn into flattery.
6. It is better to start the argumentation phrase with a discussion of those issues on which it is easier to reach agreement with the opponent. The more the partner agrees, the more chances to achieve the desired result. Only after that should we move on to the discussion of controversial issues. The main, most powerful arguments should be repeated many times, in different formulations and contexts.
7. The structuring of information works effectively: sorting, highlighting the primary arguments and organizing them. You can arrange arguments into logical, temporary, and other blocks.
8. It is useful to develop a detailed plan of argument, taking into account the possible counter-arguments of the opponent. Having a plan will help build the logic of the conversation - the core for your arguments. This organizes the attention and thinking of the interlocutor, makes it easier for him to understand the position of the partner.
9. In speech, it is better to use simple, clear expressions, without abusing professional terminology and foreign words. A conversation can “drown” in a “sea” of concepts that are vague in meaning. Misunderstanding causes irritation and boredom in the interlocutor. It is easy to find a compromise if you take into account the educational and cultural level of your opponent. To use words persistently, firmly and resolutely is the tactic of a successful diplomat.
10. Uncertainty, fuzziness can be perceived by the interlocutor as insincerity. Negotiate with reason and feel your power, emphasizing confidence in your point of view, but showing respect for the point of view of your opponent.
11. Each new thought must be clothed in a new sentence. Offers should not be in the form of a telegraphic message, but they should not be too long either. Stretched arguments are usually associated with the presence of doubts in the speaker. Short and simple phrases should be built not according to the norms of the literary language, but according to the laws of colloquial speech. The most important points can be distinguished intonation.
12. The flow of arguments in monologue mode dulls the attention and interest of the interlocutor. Their skillfully spaced pauses activate them. If it is necessary to emphasize some thought, then it is better to express it after a pause and slightly delay the speech after the promulgation of the thought. The partner will be able to take advantage of the timely pause and enter into the conversation, giving his comments. Neutralizing the interlocutor's claims along the way is much easier than unwinding a ball of them at the end of the argument. A prolonged pause makes the interlocutor tense up, fussing internally.
13. The principle of visibility is very effective when presenting arguments. The visualization of the image is facilitated by the activation of the interlocutor's imagination. To this end, it is useful to use vivid comparisons, metaphors, aphorisms that help reveal the meaning of words and enhance their persuasive effect. A variety of analogies, parallels, associations contribute to the identification of truth, when they are appropriate and take into account the experience of the interlocutor. Well-chosen examples and the facts of life itself will strengthen the arguments. There should not be many of them, but they should be clear and convincing.
15. You should never tell a person that he is wrong. This will not convince him, but will only hurt his pride, and he will take a position of self-defense. After that, it is unlikely to be able to convince him. It's better to be more diplomatic: "Maybe I'm wrong, but let's see ..." This is a good way to offer your interlocutor your argument. It is better to admit your own wrongness immediately and openly, even if it is unprofitable, but in the future you can count on a similar behavior of your partner.
16. Honesty or perseverance, softness or aggressiveness - a way of behaving in negotiations. This is what people will be ready for next time and what they will be ready to deal with. People have long memories, especially when they feel they have been treated unfairly in some way. The person who takes the aggressive approach is always trying to get as much as possible from the other party and tends to give as little as possible. The productivity of this approach is the opposite: potential partners are less cooperative and will usually not deal with this person more than once.
16. Rough approach to negotiation produces limited and short-lived results. Pushing or forcing a partner to make a decision can have the opposite effect: the opponent will be stubborn and adamant. Bringing the interlocutor smoothly into making a decision will undoubtedly require more time, patience and perseverance, but this path is more likely to achieve a satisfactory and sustainable result.
17. Do not bet in advance on the resolution of the problem in your favor. When two people are involved in a discussion, they both feel like they are being given an opportunity and that they need to get the most out of the negotiation. Each person may believe that the truth is on his side, that he is in a better position to substantiate his proposals or make demands. You may have to defend your point of view in an argument with a person who negotiates defiantly and rudely. Excessive firmness can interfere with this: it is important to be ready to make concessions in order to achieve the desired result.
18. To overcome the negative attitude of the interlocutor, you can create the illusion that the proposed idea, point of view belongs to him. To do this, it is enough just to lead him to the appropriate thought and give him the opportunity to draw a conclusion from it. This is a great way to gain his trust in the proposed idea.
19. You can refute the remark of the interlocutor even before it is expressed - this will save you from subsequent excuses. More often, however, this is done after the utterance. You should not parry right away: this can be perceived by the partner as disrespect for his position. You can postpone your response to comments until a more tactically appropriate moment. It is possible that by that time it will lose its meaning, and then the need to answer it will disappear altogether.
20. If it is necessary to express critical remarks to the opponent, one should remember that the purpose of criticism is to help the interlocutor see the mistake and its possible consequences, and not to prove that he is worse. Criticism should not be directed at the personality of the partner, but at erroneous actions and deeds. Criticism should be preceded by the recognition of any merits of the partner, this will help to get rid of resentment.
21. Instead of expressing your dissatisfaction, it is better to suggest a way to eliminate the error. This can achieve the following:
- seize the initiative in choosing the means of solving the problem that has arisen and protect their interests in the best possible way;
- leave room for further collaboration.
22. To resolve conflicts, it is useful to change the position of "I am against you" to the position of "we are against a common problem." This approach implies a willingness to negotiate terms, but it also helps to reach a solution that is as satisfying as possible for both parties.
23. The ability to end a conversation if it has taken an undesirable direction is also of no small importance. It is necessary to know the point at which to retreat, to stop negotiating due to the impossibility of accepting the required conditions.
It may also happen that the result of the negotiations did not meet the expectations of one of the partners. Probably, the reason lies not in the lack of mutual understanding, but in the erroneous tactics of conducting the discussion. Here are some typical mistakes that can occur in negotiation and prevent a successful conclusion of the discussion:
- Improvisation in preparation for a conversation.
- Uncertainty about the purpose of the conversation.
- Poor organization of speech.
- Unfounded arguments.
- Lack of attention to detail.
- Lack of sincerity.
- Absence of tact.
- Reassessment of one's own position.
- Disrespect for the position of the interlocutor.
- Unwillingness to compromise.
Those who take an active role should especially avoid such mistakes. This will help to make the argument more convincing, to gain the trust of the listener, to appear before him as a whole person.
Alexander Vladimirovich Mopozov, Head of the Department of Social Psychology of the Institute for the Humanities, Corresponding Member of the International Academy of Psychological Sciences.
Argumentation of one's own opinion on the problem.
What is an argument?
In the essay, you must express your opinion on the formulated problem, agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author, as written in the task of part C. In your answer, you must give two arguments based on knowledge, life or reading experience.
note
It is not enough just to formally state your opinion: I agree (disagree) with the author. Your position, even if it coincides with the author's, should be formulated in a separate sentence.
For example: Thus, the author seeks to convey to the reader the idea that nature has long needed the help of each of us. I fully agree with the author and also believe that humanity should reconsider its consumer attitude towards nature.
Then your position must be supported by two arguments. In this part of the work, you must strictly follow the rules for constructing a reasoning text. Argumentation is the presentation of evidence, explanations, examples to justify any thought in front of the listeners (readers) or the interlocutor.
Arguments are evidence given in support of the thesis: facts, examples, statements, explanations - in a word, everything that can confirm the thesis.
Illustrating the Argument
An important element of the argument are illustrations, i.e. examples that support the argument.
Argument collection:
Arguments worth two points
Kinds of Arguments
There are various classifications of arguments. For example, they distinguish between logical arguments - these are arguments that appeal to human reason, to reason (scientific axioms, laws of nature, statistics, examples from life and literature), and psychological arguments - arguments that evoke certain feelings, emotions in the addressee and form a certain attitude to the described person, object, phenomenon (emotional conviction of the writer, appeal to universal values, etc.).
The main thing that the writer of the essay should know is that the arguments you use “have different weights”, that is, they are evaluated by different points.
Some arguments are worth one point, while others are worth two points.
Note that two-point arguments always include a reference to the author and the title of the work. In addition, when talking about a literary text, it is not enough just to mention the author and the title of the work ( L.N. Tolstoy reflects on the problem of patriotism in the novel “War and Peace”), it is also necessary to indicate specific characters, their actions, words, thoughts that demonstrate the connection of the work of art you mention with the problem considered in the source text.
For example: M. Gorky wrote very emotionally and expressively about the problem of humanism in the story "Old Woman Izergil". Danko, the hero of one of the legends, sacrificed his life to save his people. He appeared just when people needed help, and led them, desperate and embittered, through the forest to freedom. The feat of Danko, who tore out his heart from his chest in order to illuminate the path to freedom, is a stunning example of true humanism, boundless love for people.
As an argument, estimated at 2 points, proverbs, sayings, aphorisms can be considered, but only if they are accompanied by explanations, your reflections on their content. For example: It is no coincidence that folk wisdom affirms the unconditional value of friendship: “Do not have a hundred rubles, but have a hundred friends”; “An old friend is better than two new ones”, “Seek a friend, and if you find it, take care of it” ... Indeed, true friends are ready to share grief and joy with you, to come to the rescue in difficult times. It is friends who let us know that we are not alone in this world.
I must say that any example from fiction, scientific or journalistic literature should be “framed” by your reasoning, emphasizing the connection of the given example with the problem you are considering.
When giving an example from journalistic literature, also do not forget, in addition to the author's name, to indicate the title of the note, article, essay and, if possible, the name of the publication in which this material was published.
TV journalist Oleg Ptashkin reflects on the problem of the influence of television on modern Russian society in the article "Tresh-TV", published on the website www.gazeta.ru. According to the author, modern television in Russia is experiencing an acute crisis - a crisis of ideas and meaning. Those who create TV programs do not think about the public good at all. The journalist is concerned that modern media promote lack of spirituality and immorality, accustom to the idea that a normal life for the sake of family, children, success in work is the lot of losers. The author is convinced that the main task of modern television is education: it should teach to honor the family, parents, and cultural traditions. Only then will television contribute to the revival of spirituality.
Everything that was said earlier applies to examples from the scientific literature.
People who do not shy away from life's difficulties, who boldly face the truth, are the masters of their own destiny. The historian Lev Gumilyov in his work "Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth" called such people passionaries. Among them are many great historical figures, famous military leaders, fighters for freedom and human rights, and each of them has contributed to the development of society.
In search of weighty arguments, some students boldly come up with the names of "famous publicists" or the names of non-existent works, sometimes attributing them to famous writers. For example: In one of his works "Nature", the Russian writer I. S. Turgenev reflects on the relationship between nature and man.
The critic Belinsky in his article "On Humanity" wrote that people should help each other.
You can also cite the story of A. Pristavkin "The War of Russians and Chechens" as an example.
Rest assured that all such “opuses” will be qualified as factual errors, which means that not only will you not earn points for argumentation, but you will also lose 1 point for violation of factual accuracy.
Arguments worth one point
Arguments rated 1 point, as a rule, are easier to pick up, therefore their “specific weight” is lower. Most of them are based in one way or another on our life experience, our observations of our lives, the lives of other people or society as a whole.
Examples from life. Despite the fact that the graduate's life experience is not yet very great, in his life or the life of others, you can find examples of good or bad deeds, manifestations of friendly feelings, honesty, kindness or callousness, selfishness.
Be careful with arguments of this type, because, as our experience of checking essays shows, most of them are simply invented by students and the persuasiveness of such arguments is very doubtful. For example:
From my own experience I was convinced of the dangers of cheap literature. After reading one of these books, my head hurt a lot. it a book about a thief-loser. Brad is terrible! Indeed, I was afraid that I would get brain cancer after reading this book. Terrible feeling!
I will give an example from my personal life: people are sitting on the street without housing, without food, absolutely without anything. They sit and ask for money for some food.
Unfortunately, my poor life experience does not allow me to express my extensive opinion on this issue.
Especially often in such unfortunate arguments various relatives, friends and acquaintances appear, with whom extremely instructive stories happen. For example:
I know one person who overlooked (?!) the illness and death of his father. Now his children do not help him.
My grandfather told me that his dad was in the detachment in 1812 (?!) when troops under the command of Napoleon began to attack Moscow.
A good example of the problem of this text are some of my classmates. Obviously, they were brought up too little, and they were not accustomed to work from childhood, so they do nothing.
Much less common are examples from life that can be considered suitable arguments:
I was convinced that there are not only indifferent people. Two years ago, trouble came to our family - there was a fire. Relatives, neighbors, acquaintances, and even just people who knew about our trouble, helped us as much as they could. I am very grateful to everyone who did not remain indifferent and helped me and my family in difficult times.
Observations on the life of people and society as a whole look more convincing, since individual facts in such examples are generalized and drawn up in the form of some conclusions:
I believe that empathy and compassion are instilled in people from childhood. If the child was surrounded by care and affection, then, having matured, he will give this kindness to others.
However, arguments of this type may look curious and not the most convincing:
Probably, all mothers and grandmothers are fond of women's novels. Women read all sorts of books, and then suffer from why they do not have the same as in the book.
Suggestive examples are reflections of what might happen under certain conditions:
I can't imagine my life without books: without textbooks that help us explore the world, without fiction, revealing the secrets of human relationships and forming moral values. Such a life would be incredibly poor and boring.
“Blind faith has evil eyes,” the Polish writer Stanisław Jerzy Lec once said.
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky reflected on the essence of writing talent: “Talent is the ability to say or express well where mediocrity will say and express badly.” “For others, nature is firewood, coal, ore, or a dacha, or just a landscape. For me, nature is the environment from which, like flowers, all our human talents have grown, ”wrote Mikhail Prishvin.
Remember that the persons whose statements you refer to must really be authoritative in one area or another. For example, the Dutch philosopher Benedict Spinoza generally doubted the significance of such arguments, believed that "reference to authority is not an argument."
At their core, proverbs and sayings are a kind of reference to authority. The strength of these arguments lies in the fact that we appeal to the authority of popular wisdom. Remember that a simple mention of proverbs, sayings, winged words, not accompanied by your reflections on their content, is estimated at 1 point.
It is no coincidence that Russian proverbs affirm the value of the experience of older generations: “A parent's word is not said to the wind; He who honors his parents never perishes."
References to films, which have recently been frequently found in essays, most often testify to a narrow outlook, to a small reader's experience. We are convinced that examples of friendship, humane treatment of people or heroic deeds can always be found not only in the films "Avatar" or "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone", but also on the pages of fiction.
It seems to me that the fate of the heroine of the film by V. Menshov "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" can serve as an excellent confirmation of the author's idea that a person should strive to fulfill his dream. Katerina worked at a factory, raised a child herself, graduated from the institute in absentia and as a result achieved success - she became plant director. Thus, each of us is able to achieve the realization of his dream. It is only necessary to bring its realization closer with every step, with every deed.
(It can be noted that confirmation of the author’s thought could also be found in the fate of Alexander Grigoriev, the hero of the novel “Two Captains” by V. Kaverin, or cite as an example Alexei Meresyev from the work of B. Polevoy “The Tale of a Real Man”, or recall Assol from novel of the same name by A. Green.)
Argument structure
When writing an essay, it should be remembered that between the thesis and two arguments confirming your position, there should be a clear connection, which is usually expressed by the so-called "logical transitions" - statements that connect the known information of the text with the new one. In addition, each argument is accompanied by a "micro-conclusion" - a statement that sums up some thoughts.,
Failure to follow this structure (in fact, any paragraph of coherent text is built according to this scheme) often leads to logical errors.
Common Argumentation Errors
What does an expert check?
The expert highlights that part of the text of the essay that performs the function of argumentation. Then he establishes the conformity of the argument with the asserted (the argument must prove exactly what is being asserted), assesses the degree of persuasiveness, which can manifest itself both in strict logic and in emotional evaluativeness, figurative expression.
The expert determines the number of arguments, as well as the correspondence of the argument to the semantic function: the given example should not only act as a bright narrative or descriptive microtext, but also prove or refute this or that statement.
The maximum score (3) according to the K4 criterion is given for the work in which the examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (given at least 2 arguments, one of which is taken from the artistic, publicistic or scientific literature).
Every argument has two parts. The first is the basis with which it is impossible to argue. The second is an obvious link to this foundation of a provable thought. When a mother tells her daughter not to put her fingers in the socket, the daughter obeys because a) mother is an authority (this is the basis of the argument) and b) because mother personally says not to do this (this is an obvious link).
There are many arguments, but the grounds for the arguments are much less. It is they who allow you to build your speech so that it is convincing. Below is a golden dozen of these reasons, twelve types of arguments known TOPIC: ESCALATING CLAIMS since the time of Aristotle.
1. Convincing is what can be verified
To consider something true, a person does not have to check the truth himself, it will be enough for him to have the opportunity to check. When there is a clear, accessible and real way to check, this is already enough. Then laziness (and trust in the speaker) will connect, no one will check anything, but the conviction will work.
2. Convincing is what is unique
Uniqueness is so valuable to us that we automatically consider anything that carries unique qualities or confirms uniqueness to be convincing.
So, since there are few resources similar to Lifehacker in Russia, it is the uniqueness argument that can be used to explain the need to visit it every day.
However, here it is necessary to make a reservation that it is only the West that is delighted with uniqueness, and for Eastern cultures it is inferior to authenticity. Therefore, for the representatives of the East, the following argument is better suited.
We don't question the familiar, so when something new or controversial is similar to the familiar, that's a strong enough argument that it's true.
When a guy meets a girl and tries to make a good impression on her, he thinks he is using uniqueness arguments (“I am such and such, I have such and such, I am the best”). But the girl perceives this as an argument for compatibility: it is important for her to understand how similar this person is to the best examples of male behavior imprinted in her memory.
4. Convincing is what indicates regression
Everything gets worse and worse. Well, maybe not all, but a lot. Even if not much, then certainly something. The idea of regression is hardwired into our brains: you must admit that earlier not only the trees were greener, but also the dogs were kinder, the dawns were quieter, and the products were without food. So it is very convenient to rely on the idea of regression in your proofs.
For example, the need to introduce the death penalty is easily justified by the increase in the number of crimes and/or their increased cruelty.
5. Convincing is what shows progress
Ideas of progress are even more ingrained in us than ideas of regression. We will readily accept as truth that which will confirm our faith in progress.
That is why it is convenient for a politician to rely on progress to explain the need for his re-election to some post. Although the connection of his activity with progress is not obvious, but the progress itself is not subject to doubt: it means that it is necessary to re-elect. "You have begun to live better - vote for me."
6. Persuasive follows logically from persuasive
This argument is called the causal argument. Briefly, it can be represented as a logical link "if - then". Of course, in each argument there is a logical link, but only in this it is the main supporting structure, all the emphasis is placed on it.
Example: "If we consider ourselves reasonable people, then we cannot ignore arguments based on". Or like this: "If we consider ourselves reasonable people, then we should not believe everything we read on the Internet." And also like this: "If we consider ourselves reasonable people, then we should not tolerate such bullying with three identical examples, when everything was clear without that."
7. The fact is convincing
The most common and understandable argument is the data argument. It is used most often, but not because it is the strongest, but because it is the easiest. When applying it, remember that there are no facts - only interpretations. The strength of a fact lies not in its truthfulness, but in its vividness. And in frequent repetition, but it is unlikely that you have the resources to launch propaganda, so you have to make do with brightness.
For example: "Russia is the most peaceful country, because it has never attacked anyone, has not waged offensive wars." This fact has nothing to do with historical reality, but how the argument works.
8. Persuasive is what is useful
The most honest argument - at least he tries to look like it. In the end, we really do consider everything from the point of view of usefulness. What is useful is true; what is beneficial is good. A pragmatic argument will never fail you if you can link the thesis you are proving to the real benefit of your listeners.
“Pay your taxes and sleep well,” the Federal Tax Service advises us. It may seem that this is a call to our conscience. But do not be deceived, this type of argument does not appeal to conscience, it appeals to our own, that's why it is so effective.
9. Convincing is what is based on norms
Norms should be understood as a fairly wide set of rules that exist in society. Laws, customs, traditions, prescriptions - it is convenient for truth to rely on them. Norms can be different, from social to sanitary, from linguistic to sexual, as long as they are relevant and generally recognized.
The argument, which is used to force statesmen to respond to complaints faster, is based on the norms: “According to the federal law of 02.05. case, I will be forced to apply to the prosecutor's office to attract those responsible for the failure to meet deadlines under Art. 5.59 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation “Violation of the procedure for considering citizens' appeals.”
10. Convincing is what is confirmed by authority
A more than understandable argument. Even young people who love to overthrow authorities are usually engaged in this business at the invitation of some of their authority.
Such an argument can be rude when the boss is talking to a subordinate, or it can be soft when Leonardo DiCaprio advertises watches from a billboard.
Well, it could be like this:
"Beware of morally indignant people: they have a sting of cowardly malice, hidden even from themselves."
Friedrich Nietzsche
11. Convincing is what witnesses say
The witness differs from the authority in that his opinion is interesting not because of his personality, but because of the experience that he has. Continuing the theme of advertising: luxury goods are promoted by authorities, that is, stars, and general consumer products are advertised by "witnesses" - no-names with unique experience in dealing with stains on clothes.
Example: “works because my neighbor in the stairwell was cured by homeopathy!” The strength of this argument cannot be underestimated; it is no weaker than a reference to authority.
12. Convincing is what can be presented as true
Since our brain has never been in the real world - that is, outside the cranium - it has to operate only with ideas about how everything works. Therefore, if you force the brain to imagine something, it will be almost a real fact for it. And not only for people with a developed imagination, but in general for everyone.
The argument of a real estate agent when meeting with a client in the office: “Just imagine how in the morning you admire this lake from your balcony, breathing in the fresh smells of the forest…”
In this part of the work, you must strictly follow the rules for constructing a reasoning text. The purpose of this type of speech is to convince the addressee of something, to strengthen or change his opinion. For this, a logically coherent system of proofs is used.
A typical (complete) reasoning is built according to a scheme in which three parts are distinguished:
thesis (position to be proved);
argumentation (evidence, arguments);
conclusion (grand total).
For example: There are still people who treat art, especially music, as entertainment. What a huge delusion!
“I would regret it if my music only entertained the listeners. I strove to make them better,” wrote Handel, the remarkable German composer of the 18th century.
“To strike fire from the hearts of people” - that is what the great Beethoven aspired to.
The genius of Russian music, Tchaikovsky dreamed of "bringing comfort to people."
How these words resonate with Pushkin’s amazingly simple and clear words: “And for a long time I will be so kind to the people that I awakened good feelings with my lyre! ..”
How accurately the poet defined the highest purpose of art - to awaken feelings in people! And this applies to all kinds of art, including music, the most emotional art.
Music is a big and serious part of life, a powerful means of spiritual enrichment.
(According to D. Kabalevsky)
Thesis- this is the main idea (of a text or speech), expressed in words, the main statement of the speaker, which he tries to justify. Most often, the thesis is deployed in stages, so it may seem that the author puts forward several theses. In fact, separate parts (sides) of the main idea are considered.
In order to isolate a thesis from a statement of a large volume, you can use the following algorithm:
focusing on the strong positions of the text (subheadings, paragraphs), write out from each part of the sentence expressing the main judgment (part of the thesis), separate them from the evidence;
connect the selected parts of the thesis with semantic unions (if, to, etc.) and formulate it in its entirety.
The thesis is subject to the following rules:
is formulated clearly and unambiguously;
throughout the proof remains the same;
its truth must be proved irrefutably;
proofs cannot proceed from the thesis (otherwise a vicious circle in the proof is formed).
In our case, the thesis is the main idea of the author of the text, which you are trying to substantiate, prove or disprove.
Argumentation- this is bringing evidence, explanations, examples to justify any thought in front of the listeners (readers) or the interlocutor.
Arguments- this is evidence given in support of the thesis: facts, examples, statements, explanations - in a word, everything that can confirm the thesis.
From the thesis to the arguments, you can ask the question "Why?", And the arguments answer: "Because ...".
For example, the text we read by D. Kabalevsky is built according to the following scheme:
Thesis: Treating music as entertainment is a huge misconception. Why?
Arguments(because):
music makes people better;
music awakens emotions; music brings comfort to people;
music gives rise to good feelings in a person.
Conclusion: Music is a powerful means of spiritual enrichment
Argument types
Distinguish arguments for"(your thesis) and arguments against"(someone else's thesis). Thus, if you agree with the position of the author, then his and your thesis are the same. Please note that you should try not to repeat the author's arguments used in the text, but bring your own.
Attention! Typical mistake! If you support the position of the author, you should not specifically analyze his arguments: To support his position, the author uses such arguments as ... Do not waste precious exam time on work that is not provided for by the assignment!
Arguments for" must be:
accessible, simple, understandable;
reflecting objective reality, corresponding to common sense.
Arguments against" should convince you that the arguments given in support of the thesis you are criticizing are weak and do not stand up to criticism. in the evaluation criteria of Part C). Consider the following example:
Nowadays, for some reason, professionalism has been identified with high qualification and high quality of work performed and services provided. And this is not true. All doctors are professionals, but we know perfectly well that there are both bad and good among them. All locksmiths are professionals, but they are also different. In short, professional is not necessarily a guarantee of high quality, but it necessarily expresses a certain relationship between the producer and the consumer, between the performer and the customer. A professional is an employee who, for a pay that gives him a livelihood, undertakes to fulfill the order of any client who has contacted him. That is why I look with sadness at people who call themselves professional politicians.
“Eh! - I think, - What are you proud of? The fact that he is ready to fulfill the political order of any client who has applied to you for money? But is it a virtue? (According to G. Smirnov).
Fragment of the essay: I do not fully agree with the position of the author: I believe that professionalism is not only belonging to a certain profession, but also professional skill. For example, a bad doctor cannot be called a professional. If a doctor cannot make a correct diagnosis and his treatment can harm a person, how can such a "professional" keep the Hippocratic oath?! Of course, in addition to professionalism, there is honor, conscience, human dignity, but all these qualities only direct human skills in the right direction. In my opinion, many of the troubles of our country are associated with a lack of professional doctors, teachers and politicians, as well as with the inability of the state to appreciate the work of a true professional.
Remember important reasoning rule: arguments must be given in the system, that is, it is necessary to think over with which arguments to start and with which to end. It is usually recommended to arrange the arguments in such a way that their probative power increases. Remember that the final argument is fixed in memory better than the first one. Therefore, the final argument must be the strongest.
For example: It seems to me that it is difficult to disagree with the main idea of the author: people (especially scientists) should not lose their "lively perception" of the environment. Firstly, the world around us is extremely diverse and often refutes the seemingly unshakable patterns established by man . Secondly, most of the greatest discoveries were made by scientists, who were sometimes considered crazy weirdos. In fact, Copernicus, Einstein, Lobachevsky proved to people that their special vision of the world not only has the right to exist, but also opens up new horizons of science. AND, finally, the immediacy of perception of the world, the ability to be surprised will not allow a person to lose touch with reality, turn everything around into a dry, lifeless scheme. An attentive, inquisitive person, the author tells us, should see life in its entirety. It is for such a person that chance comes to the rescue and the world is ready to reveal all its secrets./
So, your arguments must be convincing, that is, strong, with which everyone agrees. Of course, the persuasiveness of an argument is a relative concept, since it depends on the situation, emotional state, age, gender of the addressee, and other factors. At the same time, there are a number of typical arguments that are considered strong in most cases.
To strong arguments usually include:
scientific axioms;
provisions of laws and official documents;
laws of nature, conclusions confirmed experimentally;
expert opinions;
eyewitness testimony;
statistical data.
The above list is more suitable for preparing a public speech. When writing essays-reasoning, the following arguments are most often used:
proverbs and sayings reflecting folk wisdom, the experience of the people;
facts, events;
examples from personal life and the lives of others;
examples from fiction.
By the way, it is not by chance that you are offered to choose exactly three arguments, since this is the optimal number of arguments to substantiate your thought. As I.A. Sternin, “one argument is just a fact, two arguments can be objected to, but three arguments are more difficult; the third argument is the third blow, but starting from the fourth, the audience no longer perceives the arguments as some kind of system (first, second, and finally third), but as “many” arguments. At the same time, there is a feeling that the speaker is trying to put pressure on the audience, persuading” 2.
Argumentation is the bringing of evidence, explanations, examples to justify any thought in front of listeners (readers) or an interlocutor.
Arguments are evidence given in support of the thesis: facts, examples, statements, explanations - in a word, everything that can confirm the thesis.
There are different kinds of arguments (logical, psychological, illustrative).
Logical arguments are arguments that appeal to human reason, to reason. These include:
Scientific axioms;
Provisions of laws and official documents;
Laws of nature, conclusions confirmed experimentally;
Expert opinions;
eyewitness testimony;
Statistical data;
Examples from life or fiction.
Psychological Arguments - these are arguments that evoke certain feelings, emotions in the addressee and form a certain attitude towards the described person, object, phenomenon. These include:
The emotional conviction of the writer;
Examples that cause an emotional response of the addressee;
An indication of the positive or negative consequences of accepting the author's thesis;
An appeal to universal moral values (compassion, conscience, honor, duty, etc.).
illustrative arguments. An important element of the argument are illustrations, i.e. examples that support the argument.
| Thesis Argument 1 Illustrations for Argument 1 Argument 2 Illustrations for the argument 2 Conclusion | A person's speech is an indicator of his intellectual and moral development. Indeed, sometimes speech “tells” more about a person than a face, clothes, and much more. For example, among my close friends there are none whose speech would be interspersed with rude words. I am convinced that every such word carries a "negative charge". And who would like to hear from a loved one something that offends the ear? The correctness of the author is confirmed by the experience of fiction. It is no coincidence that writers have always considered a character's speech as the most important way to reveal his character. Let us recall at least Porfiry Golovlev - the hero of the novel by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin "Lord Golovlev". Yudushka (such is his nickname!) does not swear at all, on the contrary, at every step he pours out “affectionate”, diminutive words (cabbage, lampadka, oil, mother). However, throughout his speech, the hypocritical soul of a person is manifested, for whom there is nothing more precious than money and property. Thus, nothing characterizes a person better than his speech. |
With rebuttal arguments two options are possible:
1) you select two arguments that refute the truth of the author’s position, and in the conclusion you formulate a counterthesis (a thought opposite to the author’s);
2) formulating his own position on the problem, the writer puts forward a counterthesis and proves its truth with two arguments.
In this part of the work, you must strictly follow the rules for constructing a reasoning text.
The purpose of argumentation is to convince, strengthen or change an opinion. For this, a logically coherent system of proofs is used.
A typical (complete) reasoning is built according to a scheme in which three parts are distinguished:
Thesis (position to be proved);
Argumentation (evidence, arguments);
Conclusion (general total).
However, it should be remembered that you are required not only to formulate the position of the author, but to show his opinion on the problem you have highlighted and commented on.
The thesis is the main idea of the author of the text, which must be substantiated, proved or refuted. Arguments are evidence given in support of the thesis: facts, examples, statements, explanations - in a word, everything that can confirm the thesis. From the thesis to the arguments, you can ask the question "Why?", And the arguments answer: "Because ...". Distinguish between arguments "for" (one's own thesis) and arguments "against" someone else's thesis. Thus, if you agree with the position of the author, then his and your thesis are the same. Please note that you should try not to repeat the author's arguments used in the text, but bring your own.
A typical mistake of all essay writers is that if you support the position of the author, then there is no point in analyzing his arguments. Such work is not provided for by the condition of the task, which means that you do not need to spend precious time on it. Arguments "for" should be:
Accessible, simple, understandable;
Reflecting objective reality, corresponding to common sense.
Criterion 4 reads: The examinee expressed his opinion on the problem formulated by him, posed by the author of the text (agreeing or disagreeing with the position of the author), argued it (led at least 2 arguments, one of which is taken from fiction, journalistic or scientific literature)
| Traditional historical experience |
Citing arguments from the lives of others, you can write:
I remember once my mother (father, grandmother, friend, acquaintance, etc.) told how ...
It seems to me that this case convinces us that (remember what author's position you indicated, show that this example is its proof).
If you cite your own conclusions and observations as an argument. You can use these phrases:
Of course, my life experience is still very small, but nevertheless, something similar happened in my life:
OR: Despite my rather modest life experience, I remember a similar situation when I (my friend, classmate, acquaintance) ...