Quinn McNamara
English 1010 F 9:00-12:00
Professor McKeever
November 20 , 2012
Word Count: 625
Saying nothing in Five-hundred Words
This article is about how to avoid saying nothing when writing an essay where it asks one’s opinion in taking one side or another. It shows how to make a stand in argument or defense to a given topic. It does this by giving points of how to make the argument or potent to the reader or the defense of the topic more durable. It shows weak essays from strong ones. (Paul McHenry Roberts (1917-1967) taught college English for over twenty years, first at San Jose State College and later at Cornell University. He wrote numerous books on linguistics, including Understanding Grammar (1954), Patterns of English (1956), and Understanding English (1958).
The article is based on helping one to have a successful argument by straying from the obvious points to argue or defend. What I mean by this is it helps one realize that being obvious in arguing points to a given subject isn’t automatically the key to a strong summary or argument. The key is to find the reasons less likely to be argued because most people won’t. People usually read something and automatically take sides based on reasons that are right in your face instead of looking for ones hiding in plain sight. Having the same points as another person when arguing on a topic, makes it less interesting and duller. Everyone having the same issues with a certain topic makes it look like nothing is being said. Figuring out what hasn’t been said or argued throws in a whole new meaning to the subject of an article, making it more interesting catching the attention more of the reader. This also will keep the reader or the instructor more indulged in the paper. People don’t want to keep reading the same thing over and over with no other way of interpreting reasons to an argument. If that was case everyone mine as well be robots and not have a conscious. What is unknown about a topic is the most interesting because there is a lot that hasn’t been said about it then. By this I mean people will like the argument more because it points out a reason that they would have never guessed and want to learn about. It’s all about being open minded and taking things more out of context to come up with non obvious examples or reasons to argue a subject. Taking the opposite side rather than the side most people take is the best way to go. This is because most likely the paper will be different from someone else’s, thus making your opinion more worthy of reading and interesting. For example if the topic asks to argue if Michael Jordan was the whole team and reason the Chicago Bulls won six championships, most people would say he is. So most people writing on this topic will argue that he was the only reason they won six times. Instead of going along with what most people would discuss, take the opposite side. An example to this topic would be no Michael Jordan was not the only reason for the Bulls franchise success, he had the help of another star in Scottie Pippen and his other teammates as well. Without them they wouldn’t have made it or one six times. Sure Michael would have gotten his fair share of rings without Pippen’s help but not all of them; everyone had an important role on those teams. That is an example of looking at the topic of a bigger picture and not stating or arguing the obvious point people will make. It s all about being different when writing, be a better thinker and expanding ideas through the mind.
English 1010 F 9:00-12:00
Professor McKeever
November 20 , 2012
Word Count: 625
Saying nothing in Five-hundred Words
This article is about how to avoid saying nothing when writing an essay where it asks one’s opinion in taking one side or another. It shows how to make a stand in argument or defense to a given topic. It does this by giving points of how to make the argument or potent to the reader or the defense of the topic more durable. It shows weak essays from strong ones. (Paul McHenry Roberts (1917-1967) taught college English for over twenty years, first at San Jose State College and later at Cornell University. He wrote numerous books on linguistics, including Understanding Grammar (1954), Patterns of English (1956), and Understanding English (1958).
The article is based on helping one to have a successful argument by straying from the obvious points to argue or defend. What I mean by this is it helps one realize that being obvious in arguing points to a given subject isn’t automatically the key to a strong summary or argument. The key is to find the reasons less likely to be argued because most people won’t. People usually read something and automatically take sides based on reasons that are right in your face instead of looking for ones hiding in plain sight. Having the same points as another person when arguing on a topic, makes it less interesting and duller. Everyone having the same issues with a certain topic makes it look like nothing is being said. Figuring out what hasn’t been said or argued throws in a whole new meaning to the subject of an article, making it more interesting catching the attention more of the reader. This also will keep the reader or the instructor more indulged in the paper. People don’t want to keep reading the same thing over and over with no other way of interpreting reasons to an argument. If that was case everyone mine as well be robots and not have a conscious. What is unknown about a topic is the most interesting because there is a lot that hasn’t been said about it then. By this I mean people will like the argument more because it points out a reason that they would have never guessed and want to learn about. It’s all about being open minded and taking things more out of context to come up with non obvious examples or reasons to argue a subject. Taking the opposite side rather than the side most people take is the best way to go. This is because most likely the paper will be different from someone else’s, thus making your opinion more worthy of reading and interesting. For example if the topic asks to argue if Michael Jordan was the whole team and reason the Chicago Bulls won six championships, most people would say he is. So most people writing on this topic will argue that he was the only reason they won six times. Instead of going along with what most people would discuss, take the opposite side. An example to this topic would be no Michael Jordan was not the only reason for the Bulls franchise success, he had the help of another star in Scottie Pippen and his other teammates as well. Without them they wouldn’t have made it or one six times. Sure Michael would have gotten his fair share of rings without Pippen’s help but not all of them; everyone had an important role on those teams. That is an example of looking at the topic of a bigger picture and not stating or arguing the obvious point people will make. It s all about being different when writing, be a better thinker and expanding ideas through the mind.