70 writers break down the introductory material into two paragraphs: the first one introducing the problem and the thesis and the second one providing additional information or definitions, and giving background information necessary for the argument. 2. The essay should offer reasons and support for these reasons. In other words, the essay should prove its point. It is a good idea to spend one paragraph on each reason. 3. The essay should refute opposing arguments. Refute means to prove wrong by argument or to show that something is wrong. It is this characteristics that is most peculiar to the argumentative essay than to expository essays. Since there are two sides to the issue, and since you want to convince the reader that you are right, not only must you prove your own case, but you should also prove that the opponent is wrong, or at least that your points are more valid or significant. Depending on how many points the writer wishes to address, the refutation can take from one to three paragraphs. 4. If an opponent does have a valid point, concede that point. It does little good in an argument to ignore any valid points the other side may have. You can concede them and then go on to show that your points are more important anyway. 5. The conclusion should logically follow from the argument. The conclusion can summarize the main points and reassert the thesis. In an argumentative essay, however, the conclusion often makes a demand for some action. It is not uncommon, however, to see arguments in which refutation comes before the reasons section. 71 TEXT 1 The Right to Be Let Alone By Barry Glazer - How much should the government interfere in people’s lives? - In general, should it interfere, or not? 1. Government is the instrument of the people, says the United States Constitution. Those to whom the people entrust power are charged with maintaining justice, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty for all of us. Recent newspaper opinion polls, however, suggest that many Americans are dissatisfied with the men and women running our communities, our states, and our nation. More and more of us have come to believe that our leaders are isolated from the realities ordinary people face. We fear we are losing control. 2. Instead of helping to alleviate this feeling of impotence, however, politicians and bureaucrats continue to make and enforce regulations that constrain our lives and constrict our freedoms. To help people regain a rightful measure of control, government – whether national, state or local – should stay out of our private lives whenever possible. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis 1 noted, Americans treasure their “right to be let alone”. 1 Louis Brandeis was associate justice of the United States Supreme Court (1916-1939). He was a champion of individual rights. 72 3. There is no reason for the government to interfere in our lives if our behavior does not adversely affect others or if there is no immediate necessity for such interference. Were I in the throes of terminal cancer or facing the horror of Alzheimer’s disease, I should be allowed to kill myself. Faced with the agonizing degeneration of my memory and personality, I would probably want to end my life in my own way. But the government says this is illegal. Indeed, were I to call upon a doctor to assist me on this final quest, she would stand a good chance of being charged with murder. 4. The government should also stay out of an individual’s life if there is no reason to believe he is doing wrong. The Bill of Rights protects us from unlawful searches and seizures. Yet if I drive home from work in the early morning, I stand a reasonable chance of being stopped without cause at a police roadblock. While armed, uniformed officers shine flashlights in my face, I can be subjected to questions about my destination and point of origin. I can be told to produce my papers and to step out of my car. I can be made to endure the embarrassment of performing tricks to prove my sobriety. Allowing the police such powers is hardly in keeping with our government’s mission to promote justice, security, and liberty. 5. Finally, the government should refrain from creating unnecessary burdens for the American people. It should stay out of a person’s private business if such involvement burdens the individual unnecessarily or unfairly. Recently, my faithful dog Linda was dying. Because of years of abuse at the hands of her previous owner, she was no longer able to walk and had to be carried in my arms. At that time, the dog warden knocked on my door and threatened me with fines for my continued refusal to license the animal. When I told him that Linda was unable to walk, let alone leave my property, he threatened to return with the police. 6. Similarly, when I wanted to convert my garage into a den, I was overwhelmed by official red tape. The cost of construction permits and of measures to meet complex building codes cost more than the lumber, wall board, and other supplies for the project. Another example of government red tape became evident when I attempted to enroll in a Japanese language course at a community college. I was told the state required that I take a mathematics placement test or pass a course in elementary algebra first! 73 7. Clearly, government is a necessity. Without it, we would face anarchy. Yet those who roam the halls of power should remember from where their power originates and should find ways to reduce the burden of unnecessary regulations heaped on the backs of the American people. Explain what is meant by: 1. Those to whom the people entrust power are charged with maintaining justice, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of liberty for all of us. 2. Instead of helping to alleviate this feeling of impotence, however, politicians and bureaucrats continue to make and enforce regulations that constrain our lives and constrict our freedoms. 3. Were I in the throes of terminal cancer or facing the horror of Alzheimer’s disease, I should be allowed to kill myself. 4. Similarly, when I wanted to convert my garage into a den, I was overwhelmed by official red tape. 5. Yet those who roam the halls of power should remember from where their power originates and should find ways to reduce the burden of unnecessary regulations heaped on the backs of the American people. QUESTIONS FOR STUDY AND DISCUSSION 1. How did Glazer build up the introduction of his essay? Where does it end? 2. Which sentence in this essay best expresses Glazer’s purpose and central idea? 3. Why does the author mention that Justice Brandeis is the source of the quotation in paragraph 2 (and of the essay’s title). 4. Point out the three principles by which the author would restrict the government’s ability to interfere with people’s 74 lives. Can you think of some other aspects of life to add to the list? 5. Do you observe any similarity in the structure of the topic sentences in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5? Discuss the role of if- clauses? 6. What method of development does Glazer rely on most in the essay? 7. Find examples of deductive and inductive reasoning in this essay. (There are two forms of argument: inductive and deductive. In ‘inductive’ argument, you begin with a general statement and then produce facts to prove it. In ‘deductive’ argument, you infer one statement from another, beginning with a general idea and arriving at a particular one.) 8. In which part does the author address an argument that an opponent might use to dispute his? 9. Do you think the conclusion of the essay appeals to the reasoning and understanding or to the emotions of the readers? Account for your answer. 10. Pick out vocabulary that appeals to the reader’s emotions. 11. Play the role of Glazer’s opponent by responding to at least one of the examples he uses to support his thesis. 12. Think of some instances in which people would welcome government “interference”. List as many examples of such beneficial interference as you can. EXPAND YOUR VOCABULARY Match the words in Column A with their definitions in Column B A B 1) adversely a) to make sth less severe 2) to promote b) to limit or restrict what sb is able to do 3) to secure c) to put things in an untidy pile 4) welfare d) to help sth to happen or develop 5) to alleviate e) the process of becoming 75 worse or less acceptable in quality or condition 6) to constrain f) to stop yourself from doing sth, especially sth that you want to do 7) to constrict g) to walk or travel around an area without any definite aim or direction 8) to endure h) to protect sth so that it is safe and difficult to attack or damage 9) to refrain from i) official rules that seem unnecessary and prevent things from being done quickly and easily 10) throes j) negatively 11) degeneration k) to experience and deal with sth that is painful or unpleasant, especially without complaining 12) sobriety l) to restrict or limit sb/sth 13) red tape m) the general health, happiness and safety of a person, an animal or a group 14) to roam n) the fact of being sensible and serious 15) heap o) violent pains, especially at the moment of death YOUR TURN 1. Argue for or against one of the following statements “Government is but a necessary evil” or ”There can be no freedom without discipline” in an essay. Illustrate your point by some examples, incidents, etc. 76 2. Write an essay opposing or supporting the point that men and women should enjoy equal rights. 3. Write an argumentative essay discussing some debatable issues on human rights or democracy in our country. Try to sound convincing by providing concrete facts and figures. Other Possible Topics • Should everyone go to college? • Should women serve in the military? • Should students work full time while carrying a full school load? • Should younger people replace older people in the work force? • Should books, plays and films be subjected to censorship? Note: An important concern for any writer is the ability to organize his writing in a form that is easy to follow. The best way to do this is to arrange, or focus, the details you’ve collected around a central idea. The central idea is often called the main idea (thesis statement) because it conveys the writer’s main point. It is also called the controlling idea, for it controls (or determines) the kinds and amounts of detail that a paragraph or essay contains. The central idea is the focal point to which all the other ideas in an essay or paragraph point. Just as you focus a camera by aiming at a fixed point, you focus your writing by making all the details it contains relate directly to the central idea. Everything you include should help prove, illustrate, or support the central idea. You might also think of a central idea as an umbrella. It is the broadest or the most general statement in an essay or a paragraph; all other information fits under it. So, 77 1. Make sure your topic sentence or thesis statement is a complete sentence. A complete sentence contains a subject and a verb, and it expresses a complete thought. Not: Computers and being a successful college student. Or: How computers can help students succeed in college. But: Computers can help students succeed in college . 2. State your main point directly; don’t announce it. Not: I am going to write about how computers can help students succeed in college. Or: This paper (essay) will discuss the fact that computers help students succeed in college. But: Computers can help students succeed in college. 3. In most cases, readers will naturally assume that what you are writing about is your own opinion or is what you believe. There is no need to explain that. Not: I believe that computers can help students succeed in college. Or: It is my opinion that computers can help students succeed in college. But: Computers can help students succeed in college. 4. Make sure your topic sentence or thesis clearly states the point you want to make about your subject. Not: Computers affect student performance in college. But: Computers can help students succeed in college. 78 TEXT 2 There’s No Way to Go But Ahead By Isaac Asimov Isaac Asimov discusses the problems of growing industrialization and technology. But unlike those who find them responsible for many of the world’s problems, the author tells why he sees them as part of the solution. 1. We are all now aware that some new scientific or technological advance, though useful, may have unpleasant side effects. More and more, the tendency is to exert caution before committing the world to something that may not be reversible. 2. The trouble is, it’s not always easy to tell what the side effects will be. In 1846, Ascanio Sobrero produced the first nitroglycerine. Heated, a drop of it exploded shatteringly. The Italian chemist realized in horror its possible application to warfare and stopped his research at once. It didn’t help, of course. Others followed up, and it and other high explosives were indeed being used in warfare by the close of the 19 th century. 3. Did that make high explosives entirely bad? In 1867, Alfred Nobel learned how to mix nitroglycerine with diatomaceous earth to produce a safer-to-handle mixture he called “dynamite”. With dynamite, earth could be moved at a rate far beyond that of pick and shovel and without brutalizing men by hard labor. It was dynamite that helped forge the way for railroads, that helped build dams, subways, foundations, bridges, and a thousand other grand-scale constructions of the industrial age. 79 4. A double-edged sword of good and evil has hung over human technology from the beginning. The invention of knives and spears increased man’s food supply – and improved the art of murder. The discovery of nuclear energy now places all the earth under threat of destruction – yet it also offers the possibility of fusion power as an ultimate solution to man’s energy problems. 5. Or think back to the first successful vaccination in 1796 and the germ theory of disease in the 1860s. Do we view medical advance as dangerous to humanity, or refuse to take advantage of vaccines and antitoxins, of anesthesia and asepsis, of chemical specifics and antibiotics? And yet the side effects of the last century’s medical discoveries have done more to assure civilization’s destruction than anything nuclear physicists have done. For the population explosion today is caused not by any rise in average birth rate but by the precipitous 1 drop – thanks to medicine – in the death rate. 6. Does that mean science should have avoided improving man’s lot through medicine and kept mankind a short-lived race? Or does it mean we should use science to correct the possibly deleterious 2 side effects, devise methods that would make it simpler to reduce the birth rate and keep it matching the falling death rate? The latter, obviously! 7. Science and technology are getting a bad press 3 these days. Increasingly scornful of the materialism of our culture, young people speak about returning to a simpler, pre-industrial, pre-scientific day. They fail to realize that the “good old days” were really the horribly bad old days of ignorance, disease, slavery and death. They fancy themselves in Athens, talking to Socrates, listening to the latest play by Sophocles – never as a slave brutalized in the Athenian silver mines. They imagine themselves as medieval knights on armored chargers 4 – never as starving peasants. 8. Yet, right down to modern times, the wealth and prosperity of a relative few have been built on the animal-like labor and wretched existence of many – peasants, serfs and slaves. What’s more, nothing 1 “Precipitous” = “sharp” 2 “deleterious” = “harmful, causing injury” 3 “bad press” = “bad publicity” 4 “chargers” = “horses covered with metal armor” . from another, beginning with a general idea and arriving at a particular one.) 8. In which part does the author address an argument that an opponent might. in college. But: Computers can help students succeed in college. 78 TEXT 2 There’s No Way to Go But Ahead By Isaac Asimov Isaac Asimov discusses