Begging the Question

You've probably heard this colloquial phrase before. Since many arguments have premises and conclusions that result in disputes between speakers, answering one question many times naturally leads to another. For example, take a look at the following exchange:

Q: "Sugar is a toxic substance that should be regulated by the government."

R: "What evidence do you have for believing that sugar is toxic? It doesn't seem toxic; people eat it everyday and nothing bad happens.

Q: "In the short term nothing bad happens. Long term effects are very bad. There's new research that suggests eating concentrated amounts of sugar, say, drinking a can of soda or even drinking a glass of fruit juice throws our digestive and neurological system into a state of confusion. From an evolutionary point of view, sugar and fiber are a package deal. Take away the fiber? Consume only the juice? We're getting massive infusions of sugar that our bodies can't cope with in a healthy manner."

R: "Maybe you're right. Maybe in the long run sugar is toxic for the human body. But that only begs the question: Should the government regulate every substance that is toxic in the long run for the human body?"

As I said mentioned earlier, it makes sense that the phrase beg the question is so common. Discussing one issue of contention, many times leads to another issue of contention, which then leads to another issue of contention. Despite its usefulness in everyday discourse, begging the question does have a more specific meaning in logic.

In logic, begging the question is also known as circular reasoning. According to Robert  J. Gula, "When an argument uses one of its premises as a conclusion, that argument is said to be circular" (110). The conclusion to an argument could also be referred to as a thesis. Basically, a conclusion or a thesis is the proposition that is being supported by other propositions. Take the following argument:

1. Michael Jordan won Defensive Player of the Year in 1988.
2. Michael Jordan won six NBA Finals MVP awards.
3. Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player ever.

1&2 support 3. Thus, 3 would be the conclusion of the reasoning chain. Because 1&2 support the conclusion, they would be the premises of the argument. The premises support the conclusion; they do not affirm it or restate it. To restate a premise or a collection of premises as the conclusion would be to commit the fallacy of circularity. To take our previous example as illustration:

1. Michael Jordan won Defensive Player of the Year in 1988.
2. Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player ever.
3. No basketball player was ever better than Michael Jordan.

Here we have a premise (1) that supports either (2) or (3). The problem is that (2) and (3) restate the same conclusion. What a speaker is interested in is why should a person believe that Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time. (1) provides evidence to support such a belief. (2) simply affirms that the belief is true in words that are slightly different than (3).

Suppose a skeptical person is having a conversation with an acquaintance and is presented with (2). Suppose the skeptical person asks: "Why should a person believe that Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player ever?"
"Well," the acquaintance sips his beverage. "There are many reasons."
"Do you happen to have any on hand?"
"The most obvious reason I can provide is that no basketball player was ever better than Michael Jordan."

In this dialogue, the acquaintance has commit the fallacy of circularity with his last sentence. In an argument, premises and conclusions perform difference functions. Premises support a conclusion--of course, as arguments get more complex, one conclusion can be used to support another conclusion, but that's a topic for a different blog.

Using a premise to restate a conclusion using different words is not an acceptable form of reasoning.

Even when dealing with obvious truths like (2), a supporter of (2) must be ready to provide evidence if a skeptic asks for it. You may be stunned to find a skeptic, but they are out there. When you do find a skeptic, remember to keep your wits about you. Remember that (3) does not support (2), and (2) does not support (3).

The same logical rule holds when you write papers for your classes.   

Cracking the Code

The person standing in front of you hands you a document, black words on white paper. It looks familiar like you should know it intimately, yet a strange language appears in the margins. They are handwritten in a hand that is not your own. They appear deliberate as if they are right where they're supposed to be. But you don't know what they mean. The characters look like they could be letters in English but the words seem like they're only partial words. Things like "awk" or "trans" in a bold red hang on the borders of the familiar text.

We all know this scenario. The professor issues back papers with comments but they all seem to use a codified method of commentary that students aren't usually familiar with. Worse yet, though the problem is addressed by the professor, the method of redress remains a mystery. "Develop more"--develop what more?

Here I hope to dispel the mysteries of these strange writings and turn them from red-inked hieroglyphs to constructive comments.

• awk - "awkward." This is almost always a wording issue. The easy solution for this is to read the marked phrase out loud. Does it seem verbose? Do you get tongue-tied reading it? Then you might find a more concise and clear way to write it.
• trans - "transition." Sometimes you'll see this in conjunction with the word needed. All this means is that you're missing a transition from idea to idea which causes your reader to get confused. Want some suggestions for transitions? Purdue OWL's got your back.
• frag - "frag." Despite common beliefs, it does not have anything to do with grenades. This is just pointing to a sentence fragment. Double-check your sentence and make sure to make it complete. As the Purdue OWL mentions, a sentence fragment occurs when a complete sentence gets a period jammed in the middle of it or dropping a dependent clause on its own. These are easy fixes--get rid of the period or give the dependent clause a direct object or complete verb, depending on the context of the sentence.
• ref - "referent." Likely, it's a case of using words like "this" or "that" but it's unclear as to what you're referring to with them. Make it more clear what the "this" or "that" is by being more specific.
• ? - "what." That's a rough translation of the teacher's comment. It simply means that the point you're trying to make isn't getting across to the reader.
• sp - "spelling error." Check your spelling. It probably didn't get caught by spellcheck or maybe you spelled the word correctly but used the wrong one.

Teacher's comments will often be unique to their courses, so it's possible that your instructor will be the first person you want to ask when it comes to his or her comments. There are some instructors who are so nice as to give out sheets that explain the comments they usually use on a paper.

Synthesize This

Whenever I am asked to synthesize articles and write a response essay, I automatically start grooving to 80s music.

Synthesize is forever locked in my brain alongside famous SynthPop bands such as Soft Cell, Tears for Fears, and Depeche Mode (which is fun for about 15 minutes, and after that I wish for death). After I get over that 15 minute intense mental pop jam, I most often pause and say to myself, "Synthesize. Yikes. I forgot what that means! Analyze? Maybe...no...time to google."

Forgetting the definition of synthesize is easy for me because I most often confuse the term with Analysis. And guess what, I'm not the only person who does this. Truth!

This week I met three students who were working on a Synthesis paper, and each of them was inadvertently writing an analysis instead...eep! With three people being confused, I decided that this was indeed an epidemic, and something had to be done-- thus this post.

A nice simple easy definition of what a Synthesis essay does is this: To bring together your own ideas with the ideas of other writers (sources--articles, books, films, 80s music).

An Analysis means that you break a topic down into smaller parts or sections and dive into it, spend time discussing the ideas, and get extremely familiar with all aspects of the topic.

In hindsight, Analysis seems much more difficult than Synthesis, at least in definition. So, yeah! Synthesize doesn't sound so bad, right?

Also, a synthesis essay allows you to take the information that you have learned through your sources and add your own theories and ideas--and this (in my humble opinion) is more of a learning experience.

When you have studied your head off and devoted your sweet time to your selected field, you can take the knowledge you learned and enter into a conversation with other persons (your sources). Then you are able to bring everything together and come up with something new--holy cats that's sweet! And also a major Kumbaya moment.

How do you write a synthesis? First off, you read.

You read A LOT.

After your eyes have bled from all this reading, a neat trick to do is write a quick little summary regarding each of your sources. Sometimes this helps especially if you have a lot of sources and have a difficult time keeping track (not that I have ever done that...).

Once you have those summaries, quickly read through them and then take a moment. What do you think? What do you want to say regarding this conversation? Do you have something different to say? Or perhaps you have something similar to say OR the ultimate scenario--you have groundbreaking stuff to say.

What next? Write that thesis statement. Put that ultimate groundbreaking bit of information into one killer thesis statement and get to work!

The rest of the synthesis essay is written much like any other essay: introduction (possibly mention the articles/sources that you will be synthesizing), thesis statement, lots of body paragraphs with good relevant information, solid transitions, an occasional transitionary paragraph (just for kicks), and a sensational conclusion.

You will have so much fun synthesizing your own theory with that of others that this paper will write itself (seriously...this paper is a great paper to write).

So when you are assigned that synthesis paper remember to do the following: lots of reading, develop a strong thesis statement, formulate your thoughts into a conversation with that of your sources, and enjoy 80s SynthPop music.

Or you can just do THIS.

The End!

No matter how badly you want to end your paper with the ever popular "The End!" I beg you, please reconsider. Also, please refrain from using the following "End is near" signal phrases: In conclusion, To wrap this up, In summation, Let me reiterate, and Finally...

Yeesh, those are incredibly boring to read and also a teeny bit insulting to your reader who probably knows, or at least hopefully knows, that this last paragraph is indeed the end of the paper. Plus, you are super smart and don't need to resort to old cliche to note the end of your work.

What's that you say? You thought that you were always supposed to signal the end of your paper with these key phrases? Well, I reckon at one point in time that is how things were done. Not anymore. Face it: we have gotten fancy.

The conclusion is a form of writing that could be best described as an In and Out Burger Joint: You get in, you get out, you're satisfied. Or in writing terms you re-emphasize your point, again try to be catchy as you were in your introduction, and leave your reader with the feeling that the time they spent reading your paper was worth it and your words were memorable.

Nothin to it! .... You're with me, right?

Here's the thing: I know you aren't. I seem to be one of the few people who adore writing conclusions (intros too! It's the middle part that I struggle with). I have spent some time over the past several weeks working with some students on conclusions, and their most common complaint is that, "I feel like I just said all of this stuff already!" Well, if you wrote a good paper, you did mention all that stuff. So, valid point. BUT remember, really good points are worth repeating. Another frequently used argument is, "I just don't know how to end it." Well, you do. You're just at the end of the project and worn out. Don't fret ... it happens. Take a moment and step away from it--have a soda and then revisit.

If you are still struggling remember the basic definition of a conclusion: Conclusions sum up what you have been writing about in your paper.

I'm going to do a little bit of modeling for you and show you a conclusion that I recently wrote for a paper on Macbeth. (Don't be bored! It will be painless)

Example:

A culture that was familiar with the evils of prophecy, possibly Howard and Scot's articles, and the law would be unable to miss the obvious seduction of Macbeth by tempting yet unnatural and unlawful prophetic witches. If Macbeth is viewed through the lens of Scot and Howard and the conversation of the time period, it is impossible not to view Macbeth as a character who falls prey to temptation. A study in Macbeth's psyche could perhaps tell the audience more about his reasons for believing and passionately acting upon the prophecy, but with the limited amount of information we as readers/scholars/viewers are given the idea that Macbeth is a man who strays from the Divine and follows the devil's familiars is impossible to ignore. Macbeth's folly is his desire to know what only God can, but is that not the folly of man?

Whew. Still with me? Did you notice what I did?

First of all I didn't say: In conclusion, etc. I referred back to the culture that I had mentioned in the intro and middle of my paper (I guess you just have to trust me on that), I reiterated some points that I had made in my paper--didn't flat out state them again but instead I changed the way that I had written them before (which of course you don't know, but believe it), and then I ended with a line that reminded my reader of my thesis statement, which was that Macbeth's greatest evil was being tempted by the devil because he wanted to know the future. The ending of my conclusion is also provocative enough to leave my reader thinking and wanting to learn more, argue, or write about the amazing point I made in my paper.

Another fun trick is to end a conclusion by using a bit of humor (as long as that humor is paper/audience appropriate) or at least try to be entertaining--it's almost like a "thank you" to your reader. Just as you grabbed them with your super fabulous introduction that Doug Urbanski blogged about at the beginning of the week, you want to snag them again with your conclusion. What better way to do that then use a little bit of humor? Is this the time to bust out your best "Why did the chicken cross the road?" joke? It depends on the paper topic and your best judgement. And if you're cracking "Chicken Cross the Road" jokes, I think that comedy might not be your forte.

Writing the conclusion does not have to be frustrating. What you write is important so don't be afraid to emphasize your valuable message! When you feel that you can't possibly write anymore--have that soda! If you can add something humorous, something that will make your reader smile. Perhaps revisit a snarky pun you made in your introduction? The End.

Writing Really is Everywhere!

Papers, papers, papers. They come in all different forms and styles, especially while you’re in your undergrad program at EIU. I remember thinking that just English majors wrote papers, and everyone else was home free, but I was very wrong. So I wanted to make sure that everyone realized how important the skill of writing is to your future career.

Regardless of your major the Writing Center here at EIU is here to help!

We don’t edit papers, but rather those of us that work in the Writing Center want to help writer’s gain skills that will help them create skills to help with other classes and the careers that you so choose. Because regardless of the place of employment that you end up in, writing will be an aspect of your job, even if it’s engineering or working maintenance.

At the Writing Center we will help you with any assignment that you may have that’s writing related. Here are some examples of the array of things we can help students with.

Narratives

Lesson Plans

Case Studys

Research Papers in any area

Business Proposals

Aspects of writhing a thesis in a masters program

Grad School Application Essays

Essays for scholarship

Lab Reports

APA, MLA, Chicago citations

These are just few of the many areas of writing that you can get help with at the Writing Center.

So don’t be afraid or scared if you hear you have a lot of writing to do in a science class or any other class. Lab reports also require a lot of writing and analysis, and people at the Writing Center can help if you get confused on format or citing or just figuring out where to begin! The biggest help at times may be to also know that you aren’t alone. There are many other students out there who need help on their writing.

A Question of Thesis

It's the beginning of the semester, which means a fresh batch of writing assignments threateningly leering over our shoulders and breathing down our necks like paper trolls. As unpleasant of an image as it might appear, this is the common view after sitting down and taking a second glance at the instructor's syllabus, regardless of whether a student is just beginning his or her college experience or eagerly inching towards graduation day.

The first thought the student may have is how am I going to finish all of this? The harder question comes when the student actually begins his or her essay: Where to begin? Often, just starting an essay becomes the most strenuous part, regardless of the writer's level of preparedness. The thesis is a writer's argument, the genesis of his entire paper. Without it, the paper lacks focus and even purpose.

In the essay "What Tutoring Is: Models and Strategies" from Donald A. McAndrew and Thomas J. Reigstad's book Tutoring Writing: A Practical Guide for Conferences, the authors identify a few strategies for responding to "high-order concerns," or HOCs (42). Thesis development is considered a high-order concern particularly because of how much of the paper depends on the thesis. Without a thesis, a paper buckles and collapses.

One suggestion that McAndrew and Reigstad makes for combating the no-thesis blues is to "create a headline or bumper sticker." The authors argue that "either of these requires that the writer find one thing that is central to the piece and say something about it." Suggestions include a subject like "Causes of the Civil War" or even a bumper sticker-like phrase like "_______ Is Not a Family Value" (44).

One of the reasons why the headline/bumper sticker tactic would work is that it's such an "out-of-the-box" idea that the uniqueness itself might spark the critical thinking necessary for building a clear and concise thesis. Another reason (and why I find it so appealing) is that its background in journalism and creativity might lead those of other disciplines to feel more comfortable in crafting an essay that depends so much on a thesis.

McAndrew and Reigstad list numerous other thesis-generating strategies, but the headline/bumper sticker one seems so out there that students could benefit from discovering less-orthodox methods of combating the paper trolls that await writers from the beginning of the semester until the end of finals week.