General Argument Essay
Question 3
Question 3 --The General Argument Question
Springboard Diving Analogy . . .
Let’s look at a prompt.
Prompt -- Question 3
Carefully read the following passage from Michael J. Sandel’s book Justice: What’s the Right Thing To Do?, published in 2009. Then write an essay in which you develop a position on Sandel’s claim that for the common good, citizens should openly address moral disagreements on matters of public policy. Use evidence from your experience, observations, or reading.
[W]e need a more robust and engaged civic life than the one to which we’ve become accustomed. In recent decades, we’ve come to assume that respecting our fellow citizens’ moral and religious convictions means ignoring them (for political purposes, at least), leaving them undisturbed, and conducting our public life -- insofar as possible -- without reference to them. But this stance of avoidance can make for a spurious respect. Often, it means suppressing moral disagreement rather than actually avoiding it. This can provoke backlash and resentment. It can also make for an impoverished public discourse, lurching from one news cycle to the next, preoccupied with the scandalous, the sensational, and the trivial.
Address the Prompt!
You have to:
develop a position on Sandel’s claim that for the common good, citizens should openly address moral disagreements on matters of public policy.
Key words and phrases -- take apart the prompt
“For the common good”
“Openly address”
“Moral disagreements”
“Public policy”
Spend some time contemplating or brainstorming about these key phrases . . .
This is YOUR essay. YOU define the terms. YOU control the discussion. YOU start to decide how to tackle these questions.
Be careful . . .
Don’t oversimplify the prompt
Don’t get distracted by side issues (which might have been suggested by a tangent in the given quote)
Preliminary Plan
Thesis? (answer the question/state your position)
Evidence? (how you are going to prove/support your position) (appropriateness?)
What is “appropriate evidence”?
From “experience, observations, or reading”
Let’s brainstorm some ideas of what you could use to support your position.
Appropriate Evidence -- “Experience”
Family discussions about moral issues (such as LGBT rights, abortion, etc.)
Classroom discussions/Socratic Seminars
Appropriate Evidence -- “Observations”
Historical Examples
Slavery
Civil Right Movement
Women’s Suffrage
(Warning: Be careful not to oversimplify. The Civil War, for example, could NOT have been avoided if people had just talked about their disagreements.)
Appropriate Evidence -- “Reading”
The Jungle
Uncle Tom’s Cabin
The Scarlet Letter
I tell my students that they should introduce supporting evidence drawn from books with an introductory phrase such as:
Appropriate Evidence -- “Observations”
Current Events (Issues with Moral components)
Social Justice Warriors (SJW)
Black Lives Matter Movement
LGBT Rights/Same Sex Marriage/Transgender Bathroom Bill
Political Correctness
Debate in Congress (how it works)
Trump/Clinton Election
Orlando Pulse Nightclub shooting
Immigration Raids/The “Wall”/”A Day Without Immigrants”
Women’s March/Gender Wage Gap
Standing Rock Protests/Dakota Access Pipeline Controversy
Muslim Travel “Ban”
Abortion/Defunding Planned Parenthood
Gun Control/Open Carry
Unique, interesting evidence/examples
Vietnamese singer Viet Khang (uses his voice to protest against Vietnamese government)
Controversy over racist graffiti on UT campus
Malala Yousefy
Milo Yiannopoulos
Writing your Thesis Statement
Respond to the prompt (directly!)
Avoid the “forecasting thesis.”
Example of forecasting thesis: “I agree that people should openly address their moral disagreements on matters of public policy because there is strength in numbers, evil in complacency, and such open address has proved successful in the past.”
“I agree that people should openly address their moral disagreements on matters of public policy because there is strength in numbers, evil in complacency, and such open address has proved successful in the past.”
Instead, turn those three reasons into topic sentences:
If citzens openly discuss moral disagreements, they can find commonality and therefore discover the truth that there is often strength in numbers.
If neighbors, co-workers, and family members do not openly discuss moral beliefs, relationships become shallow; such complacency breeds evil.
We can be reassured in the knowledge that open robust discussion has proven successful in the past.
Try to avoid clichés
HOWEVER -- sometimes it works to point out clichés that are misguided or un-true. For example, one student wrote that “ignorance is not bliss” and went on to argue that the more knowledge we have about each other’s beliefs, the better we will get along.
Other things to avoid