Arguing Pokemon
Who taught me how to write arguments? Hmm… That is a really good question. I remember specifically who taught me how to write research papers. It was my senior year in high school, for my senior project. Her name evades me, but she did a good job. As far as argument goes I am not one hundred percent sure. If I was forced to guess, which I am for the blog, I would have to say it was my English 1010 professor, Dr. Barlow. I could have been taught earlier but I do not remember. English 1010 is as far back as I can go for being taught argument.
I took the class out in far off Davis campus, so the class was pretty quiet and nonparticipating. Dr. Barlow just stood at the front of the class and lectured off the qualities of an argumentative paper. First of all we had to come up with a topic. The topic had to be wide enough to write on, but not too broad for the allotted pages. If the topic was too broad we would not have been able to argue it effectively in a short paper. Guns and abortion were out as topics. The topic had to be actually arguable. This versus that. Or, that versus this. The topic could not be something unarguable topic like, Pokémon is a good TV show. We were taught that there had to be two sides to the argument and to pick one and fight for it. The best kind of an argument paper is one that acknowledges both sides and gives arguments for both sides, but then totally destroys the opposing side’s arguments. Our guidelines for the argument paper were very specific. First the paper had to very clearly list both sides of the topic, and which side was going to be argued for. Then the topic was explained. Followed by why the chosen side was better. Then it was conclusion time, which was basically just repeating in one sentence why the chosen side of the topic was better than the other.
Unfortunately, my first argumentative paper on the university level was on the Iraq war. I say unfortunately because that is one boring, lame, and overdone topic. In my defense it was like three years ago before the topic was over argued, and the country was still split on whether or not it was a good thing. Luckily that changed, for the most part. How much cooler would an argumentative paper about Pokémon be? Much cooler is the answer to the previously stated question. Pokémon being a cool TV show is not argument enough, so I would have to change it something like, Pokémon is a better TV show compared to Yu-Gi-Oh. This topic can actually be argued. Pokémon has better core values, and shows much stronger friendships. Plus who would not want to own a Charmander? Only a crazy person would answer no to this question. And Pokémon has a better storyline because it is deeper and more involved. These are reasons that give credence to Pokémon. And that is how to write argument.
I took the class out in far off Davis campus, so the class was pretty quiet and nonparticipating. Dr. Barlow just stood at the front of the class and lectured off the qualities of an argumentative paper. First of all we had to come up with a topic. The topic had to be wide enough to write on, but not too broad for the allotted pages. If the topic was too broad we would not have been able to argue it effectively in a short paper. Guns and abortion were out as topics. The topic had to be actually arguable. This versus that. Or, that versus this. The topic could not be something unarguable topic like, Pokémon is a good TV show. We were taught that there had to be two sides to the argument and to pick one and fight for it. The best kind of an argument paper is one that acknowledges both sides and gives arguments for both sides, but then totally destroys the opposing side’s arguments. Our guidelines for the argument paper were very specific. First the paper had to very clearly list both sides of the topic, and which side was going to be argued for. Then the topic was explained. Followed by why the chosen side was better. Then it was conclusion time, which was basically just repeating in one sentence why the chosen side of the topic was better than the other.
Unfortunately, my first argumentative paper on the university level was on the Iraq war. I say unfortunately because that is one boring, lame, and overdone topic. In my defense it was like three years ago before the topic was over argued, and the country was still split on whether or not it was a good thing. Luckily that changed, for the most part. How much cooler would an argumentative paper about Pokémon be? Much cooler is the answer to the previously stated question. Pokémon being a cool TV show is not argument enough, so I would have to change it something like, Pokémon is a better TV show compared to Yu-Gi-Oh. This topic can actually be argued. Pokémon has better core values, and shows much stronger friendships. Plus who would not want to own a Charmander? Only a crazy person would answer no to this question. And Pokémon has a better storyline because it is deeper and more involved. These are reasons that give credence to Pokémon. And that is how to write argument.
posted by Eric at 1:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home