There are two broad approaches to argument. The first is the Call for Action. Argument essays following this approach focus on establishing the need for action and providing evidence to support that need. The second broad approach involves Conflicting Positions. Argument essays following this approach accept the need for action but argue between two or more options to meet the need. Sometimes an argument following the call to action approach will also suggest a plan of action that calls for accepting a particular position as best meeting the need, in effect, blending the two approaches.
During President Obama's first term, President Obama primarily focused his speeches on health care reform on the call to action, emphasizing the need for health care reform. In the House and Senate, members of Congress argued between conflicting positions, discussing and debating which approach to health care is most effective. In speeches where the President emphasized the need for a public health care option, his speeches blended the two approaches, identifying a need and suggesting a plan of action to meet the need.
Argument essays can be organized in different ways depending on the essay's purpose and the topic under consideration. Argument essays organized as a debate compare two or more options with the purpose of showing that one option is superior to the others. Toulmin essays, named for philosopher Stephen Toulmin, provide evidence for a claim while anticipating audience responses. Rogerian essays, named for psychologist Carl Rogers, compare options by examining their relative weights in an effort to determine the best option. Persuasive essays argue a single position or course of action that the audience should choose. Finally, satire is a special kind of literary argument that holds some position up for ridicule.
Persuasive essays are most often used for call to action papers. Debate essays are most often used for conflicting positions papers. Rogerian and Toulmin essays are most frequently used for blended approaches. Satire is often used as a call for a change in action by ridiculing an exaggerated conflicting position or a social role or attitude standing in the way of action. One of the most famous satirical essays is Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal."
The following chart examines some of the similarities and differences between these types of argument essays [Note: The acronym SIRV stands for Significance, Importance, Relevance, or Value].
| Type | Focus | Thesis (SIRV) | Topic sentences identify | Body Paragraphs | Common conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debate | favor one option in opposition to others | of option | arguments/counter-arguments | provide evidence to support arguments/to counter opposing arguments | strength of pro position; call to support |
| Toulmin Model | establish a claim | of claim | data, warrants, backing, rebuttals (Barnet and Bedau 251-9) |
Data: the premises/evidence in support of claim Warrants: Reasons why grounds support or guarantee the claim Backing: reasons for accepting the grounds as good Rebuttals: identifying and responding to objections (Barnet and Bedau 251-9) |
summation |
| Rogerian Model | weigh options and recommend strongest | of issue | relative strengths/weaknesses | analyze strengths/weaknesses analyze relative weights |
qualified call for response; request for further study |
| Persuasive | new course of action/new idea | of issue | reasons support proposed view/course of action | provide evidence to support proposal; provide anecdotal or human interest support for action or view |
plea, often emotional, for support |
| Satire | flawed position held up to ridicule using a variety of figures of speech | of issue | qualities of position/steps to implementation | narrative describing qualities/nature; narrative/arguments outlining action plan |
SIRV of benefits; call for action (ironic) |