At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
My Topic is * Should dying people be kept on life support? And I also came up with 3 points Thesis- No, A Dying person should not be kept on life support Strongest Reason - Once a person has reached the jaws of death, there is no escape. They are unable to walk, walk or do anything in life, dying is the best option to take them out of their misery Weakest Reason – It is very expensive and puts a strain on the energy use and ultimately it proves to have no profit 2nd Strongest Reason – This practise is not ethical and interferes with the cycle of nature, if a being has no chance of getting better why force them to stay alive. – they get weakter and he same treatment can be considered harmful if it causes pain or prolongs the dying process without offering benefit. The outcome may diminish a person’s quality of life. The problem I am having is that every time I start writing a paragraph for my first point, I end up merging the other 2 points I have and then I only have one point and cant get more because they were used as supporting points in my first paragraph. Can Someone write this essay - Or even just one paragraph because I am having trouble coming up with supporting points for the main points I have Thanks
*I wold really like it if someone gives me an example (sorry not the whole essay) So I can base my work on that
So, I'm not going to be able to directly help you with this essay, but I can offer you some advice that should help, in this essay and others. When it comes to developing supporting points (three in this case), I'm sure you know all the best ways to do that - for me it's typically brainstorming everything I can think of in two separate sessions and write it all down and find the three that seem the best. In the situation you are describing, where you can't find three *unique* points to support your thesis, this *could* speak to an issue with the thesis itself. Perhaps it is too narrow and needs to be expanded. In practice, it is nice to have a firm idea of what you want to write, but when it comes down to actually researching and developing your ideas, you shouldn't remain dogmatic in holding on to *this is my topic and I'm not changing it.* That's all I got for you, good luck!
@waheguru Sorry for jumping in late, but I was at work when you sent the PM to me. @cshalvey makes some good points and has some good general advice, but I think I can provide a little depth that could help you even more. The first thing I noticed was that you have: "Thesis- No, A Dying person should not be kept on life support" Now I'm not sure if you intend this to be your thesis statement, but if so it needs work. It is rather weak. Remember a thesis statement is what drives your paper, but let's not worry about that for now. Thesis statements are easier to write when you have solid points for the thesis. Next, your points seem contrived to me. In other words, I question whether you have researched your subject. I'm not saying that you haven't, I'm just saying that from your supporting arguments, it sounds like you are writing from your own opinion rather than from research. This is no good. You must base a persuasive paper in fact otherwise you will persuade no one. This is not to say that your points are not valid or bad, they just lack authority, which is easily changed with some research. Start with this Google search: http://bit.ly/Qm1ZwB and read several articles, not just one. If you need peer-reviewed or journal articles do a search on Google Scholar: http://scholar.google.com/ Pull notes from some of the article s that you read that support your opinion. You can use these in the paper. Another problem with your points is that as you stated, your second and third points keep blending. Part of this is due to the fact that you are not balancing your argument with a counter point. All three points that you have are in support for your argument. Now while there is nothing inherently wrong with this it is part of the reason your points are trying to blend together. There are a couple of good reasons to have a counter point in there. First, as I alluded to, a counter point is going to bring balance to your paper. When a paper is too one-sided, the points, unless they are very clearly defined, have a tendency to want to support each other causing them to seem like one broad point. Having a counterpoint gives you something to contrast your supporting points against and help you to keep those points separate and clearly defined. Second (and this is probably the most important reason to have a counter point), a counter point is going to bring an unbiased tone to your paper. Incorporating a counter point into your paper shows your audience that you have considered the other side of the argument and have done your research. This adds huge amounts of credibility to you writing. The more credible your writing, the more likely people are to be persuaded by it. By writing only one side you subconsciously tell you audience that you could care less that they have a different opinion that you. Always keep in mind that your audience is not the people that agree with you. It is those that have the contrary opinion. If you don't acknowledge that opinion they will not listen to you. So in my opinion, the counter point is just as, if not more important than the supporting arguments. If your audience stops listening after the introduction because you do not recognize their point of view, it does not matter how strong your supporting arguments are, you are not going to reach them. So with this in mind go back to Google or Google Scholar and research arguments against your opinion. Do the same type of research and take the same type of notes. Try to put yourself in the shoes of someone with that opinion and pretend that is the the point of view you are writing your paper from. This is important because if you just go into researching counter points with your own opinion or from the view point to which you are trying to persuade people to, you will only look for the weakest points. Once you have done all your research both for and against, do this: 1. write down (in one sentence) the strongest argument supporting your thesis or opinion 2. write down (in one sentence) the second strongest argument supporting your opinion 3. write down (in one sentence) the STRONGEST arguement against your opinion These three sentences are what you will formulate your thesis statement from and will be included in your introduction. I think this is enough to at least get you started. If you need help formulating a strong, driving thesis statement, just let me know. Also let me know if there is anything I need to clarify. I typed this kind of fast with a lot of other stuff on my mind, so don't be afraid to tell me if something does not make sense.
@jagatuba Wow, what an amazing answer. Yea I agree I need to do more research to make it more persuading. One thing I don't really understand is how to balance my points with counter points, (Wouldn't a counter point be telling why the dying person should be on life support, and how can I make it so the audience will understand why that person should be not kept on life support) It would be really helpful if you can formulate an example paragraph because my points get merged. Thanks you your amazing help
Well I cannot write it for you, but I think I can clarify it for you better. You are not trying to come up with points that counter each of your best arguments. You are trying to come up with ONE point that counters your over all thesis. Here's an example: Thesis statement: Cats make better pets than dogs. (This is just a simple thesis statement since we are focusing on the points) Strongest point: Cats have soft fur for their hole life Second strongest: Cats are always mellow Strongest counter point: Dogs are super loyal See how each supporting point supports the thesis and the counter agues against the thesis but not the supporting points. That is what I meant by including a counter point. I have to go to work soon, so if you have other questions, just put them here and DM me. I'll get to them when I get home.
I don't understand how I can use the counter point to my advantage
You don't use the point that dogs are super loyal to show that cats are better pets. You use it to show that dogs have their strong points too and that you have looked at both sides of the argument. You job is to prove that your two supporting points are better or more important than your counter point. Make sense? By showing your audience that you have actually looked into the other side of the argument, you buy yourself credibility and lower their guard to be more accepting to your viewpoint. If you do not do this they will just ignore you. It is part of rhetoric that is essential to winning over your audience. they have to be able to relate to you. Let me put it in the context of this example. Dog lovers are going to approach your thesis with their shields up. They are going to read your title and think, "Oh great. Another cat lover babbling his babble." Then they move to the introduction. After reading that if all the points that you bring up only deal with cats they are going to stop reading right there. "Nope not interested in what this cat lover has to say." However, if they read the intro and see that you bring up a valid point that is contrary to your argument, you are going to pique their interest and they are likely to read the rest of the essay. Once you have them hooked it is then up to you to prove that you have researched the subject and have discovered that your points are stronger that the point you bring up against it. You come off as unbiased (even though you totally are) and have a good chance (if your argument is good and solid) of convincing them that you are right. And even for those you cannot convince, if you've done a good job, they are more open minded and have some food for thought that they go away with. Just yesterday in chat Hero was trying to convince me that voting for Ron Paul would be a good vote. I know this to be false, but he did nothing to even get me to open my mind. He was dead set buried in his opinion and had done no research of preparation in looking at other points of view. Needless to say, he did not get far with me or the other person in the conversation. In fact, we finally started ignoring him, as he was vehement to convince us he was right. His rhetoric was bad. He did not win us over and we did not listen to him.