Argumentation is understood as the process of bringing evidence, explanations, and sources into a system to substantiate any idea in front of listeners or an interlocutor.
From the above definition it is clear that:
– argumentation is a system of statements hierarchically related to each other;
– argumentation is a process , therefore, it is necessary to arrange statements and arguments in a certain thoughtful sequence.
The fact that the arguments you give form a system and are arranged in a certain sequence should be obvious not only to you, but also to your listeners, that is, the argumentation must be carried out in such a way that the listeners perceive the arguments. Thus, the speaker’s task is not only to offer a certain system of arguments in defense of a certain idea, but also to ensure its understandability and accessibility to the audience.
Goals of Argumentation
The arguments that the speaker gives are divided into arguments for and against.
Your pro arguments must convince your audience that they:
Accessible, simple and understandable;
Are as close as possible to the opinions established in the audience, ideas about justice, honor, and social ideal;
Reflect objective reality and correspond to common sense.
The arguments “against” should convince the audience that the positions or points of view you criticize do not have the same features that are highlighted above for the arguments “for”.
To achieve the goals of argumentation, it is necessary to use the strongest possible arguments. The strength of an argument is a relative concept, as it depends on the situation, the emotional and mental state of the listeners and many other factors - gender, age, professional training of the audience, etc. However, there are a number of typical arguments that are considered strong by most audiences. Such arguments usually include: scientific axioms, provisions of laws and official documents, laws of nature, conclusions confirmed experimentally, expert opinions, references to recognized authorities, quotations from authoritative sources, eyewitness testimony, statistical data.
The optimal number of arguments when proving a thesis is considered to be “three”: one argument is still just a fact, two arguments “firstly, secondly” can be objected to, but three arguments are more difficult to do. The third argument is the third strike; starting from the fourth argument, the audience, as already noted, perceives the arguments no longer as a certain system (“first, second and, finally, third”), but as “many” arguments; in this case, one often gets the impression that the speaker is trying to put pressure on the audience, “persuading.” There is an old saying: he who proves a lot proves nothing. So, “many” begins with the fourth argument.
Methods of argumentation
There are various classifications of methods of argumentation. Summarizing them, we can talk about the following methods.
I. Top-down and bottom-up argumentation
These modes of argumentation differ in whether the argument strengthens or weakens towards the end of the speech.
Top-down argumentation is when the speaker makes the strongest arguments first, then the less strong ones, and ends the speech with an emotional request, motivation, or conclusion.
According to this principle, for example, a statement will be constructed asking for help in resolving the housing issue: “Please pay attention to my plight with housing. I live... I have... Please help me.”
The advantages of top-down argumentation are that it:
Makes it easier to attract and retain the attention of the audience;
Makes thoughts work actively at the beginning and feelings at the end of the speech;
The first arguments are better remembered.
Observations show that top-down argumentation is most effective with an audience that is poorly prepared, has little interest, or is completely uninterested.
It is also necessary to keep in mind that weak arguments with top-down argumentation look better than with other methods of argumentation. As noted by E.A. Yunina and G.M. Sagach, “if “weak” arguments are used as a complement to “strong” ones (and not as relatively independent ones), then the degree of their “weakness” decreases, and vice versa.”
Rising argumentation suggests that the argument and the intensity of feelings increase towards the end of the speech.
This principle is used to construct, for example, the following speech: “Okay, we’ll see who is right in the end... We already have experience... We have created organizational structures... We managed to attract leading specialists... We are now We know exactly what not to do... In general, for one beaten, they give two unbeaten!”
The advantage of upward argumentation is that it brings the audience's mental activity and emotional intensity to the limit.
This method of argumentation is effective in a prepared, highly interested audience. It is effective if:
– the atmosphere in the audience is calm and they are ready to listen to the speaker;
– the idea that needs to be substantiated is complex;
– the problem for the audience is not completely resolved;
– the audience will be able to draw their own conclusion.
II. One-sided and two-sided argumentation
The speaker’s one-sided argumentation of his position presupposes that:
– either only arguments “for” are presented (pure positive);
– or only arguments “against” are presented (pure negativity).
With two-sided argumentation, the listener is given the opportunity to compare points of view, choose one of two, presenting opposing points of view.
A variation of the method of two-sided argumentation is the so-called method of counter-argumentation, when the speaker presents his arguments as a refutation of the opponent’s arguments, having previously stated them. For example: “They say that we don’t know how to work, we’re not able to manage... Well, let’s look at the facts...”
The opponent in two-sided argumentation and counterargumentation can be either real (for example, a person who is the bearer of certain views) or “fictitious”, constructed by the speaker himself. This technique is called “stuffed opponent”: some typical opinion on an issue is modeled, stated, all the pros and cons are analyzed, and conclusions are drawn.
During the course of the speech, the “invention of the opponent” technique can also be used, when the speaker, having put forward a certain position, objects to himself on behalf of some anonymous opponent: “They can say that ...”, “One can foresee the objection that ...”, “ Here it is often objected that...”, etc.
What can be said about the effectiveness of unilateral and two-sided argumentation? A.V. Steshov, Yu.S. Krizhanskaya, V.P. Tretyakov et al. relate these two methods of argumentation as follows:
One-sided - effective for strengthening the consciousness of people who already have views and attitudes towards the proposed material; it works well on people with little education; it allows them to develop less persistent beliefs; it teaches them to perceive ready-made thoughts.
Two-sided, counter-argumentation is effective in influencing the consciousness of people who have a negative attitude towards what is being communicated, it has a better effect on a prepared audience, promotes the development of immunity to manipulation of consciousness in the future, increases resistance to counter-propaganda, develops more persistent beliefs, teaches analysis, and drawing independent conclusions.
III. Inductive and deductive argumentation
Inductive argumentation is based on building a narrative from facts to conclusion. Specific facts are given, and in conclusion the speaker draws a general conclusion from them. For example, several facts of clamping down on press freedom are given. Then the question is asked: “Who is clamping down? Apparently, there are forces interested in this. Who are they? And here the speaker sets out his understanding of the problem and draws a conclusion.
Inductive presentation of material is effective in female audiences, in youth audiences (especially in the age group from 18 to 23 years), in social scientific audiences.
A variation of the inductive construction of argumentation is the construction of a speech by analogy: “Not only in the Baltic states, but also in Vologda there are good roads... In Vologda, a cooperative is engaged in roads, but we need to wait for centralized help. In Vologda, the cooperative works like this... We also have conditions... If we create a cooperative, our roads will be no worse than in Vologda and the Baltic states.”
It must be borne in mind that constructing a speech by analogy significantly increases the accessibility of the idea, makes it visual, but does not increase the persuasiveness of the presentation, since “every analogy is lame” and you can always say: “That’s how it is with them.” We will never have it like this...” - and all the efforts of the speaker are in vain.
Deductive argumentation is built from a general premise to facts. For example: “Many old people, pensioners, elderly people now need help. Who will help them? ... They can make their contribution... They should help... It is necessary to create special services.”
Deductive argumentation is more often effective in male audiences, in natural science audiences, and in older listeners (over 23 years old). It has been noted that this type of argumentation has a greater effect than others in a critical audience: if the speaker immediately states what he preaches or defends, then this reduces the level of criticality of the audience’s perception.
IV. Refuting and supporting arguments
In refuting argumentation, the speaker destroys real or possible counterarguments of a real or “invented” opponent. At the same time, positive arguments are either not given at all, or they are given very little attention during the speech.
In supportive argumentation, the speaker puts forward only positive arguments and ignores counterarguments.
An experimental study by the American scientist W. McGuire showed that refuting argumentation immunizes the position of listeners; the results of such argumentation are more stable over time and more resistant to pressure.
The effectiveness of argumentation is also influenced by the order in which speakers polemicize with each other. It has been noticed that if a speaker speaks in front of his opponent, then it is more effective to first present his thesis and evidence, and then briefly criticize the future opponent, sowing doubts in the audience in advance.
If the speaker has to speak after his opponent, then it is more effective to first turn to the analysis of his speech, analyze his arguments, and then bring your own and draw a conclusion.
Interference with the perception of argumentation
The speaker, arguing his point of view, encounters a number of factors that weaken the effectiveness of his argument. These factors are very diverse, and it is necessary to know at least the most basic and typical ones in order to try to avoid their adverse effects during the performance process.
Favorable perception of the speaker's argumentation is hampered by the contradiction of information previously perceived. The audience, like any individual person, when hearing something, is subjectively ready to perceive a continuation, and not something that overturns existing ideas. Therefore, it is more advantageous to speak at the end rather than at the beginning of the meeting; you need to know what was communicated to the audience before you in order to build on it and use this information: you need to give the audience the impression that you are continuing what was previously said.
The audience does not like repeated repetition of the same thought - such repetitions irritate them. It has been established that repeating an idea or thought four times only doubles the number of those who perceive and remember it, and more frequent repetitions practically do not give the desired result. The optimal number of repetitions is three.
The speaker’s abuse of foreign terms disturbs the audience. As special studies have shown, most people do not understand foreign terminology well and do not like it.
The speaker should not make speech errors or deviate from the norms of speech culture. It is interesting that if the audience detects a speech error in the speaker, then it develops distrust of the information being conveyed and doubts about the professional competence of the speaker.
The abundance of details and arguments worsens the perception of argumentation. We have already noted that the best number of arguments is three. Cicero said: “In public speech one must say what is necessary, and not say what is not necessary.”
And one more thing: the recognition of the source of information in the speaker’s speech greatly undermines the trust of the audience. If a speaker reports a certain fact, and the audience finds out: “Yes, this is from yesterday’s Izvestia” or “This is from the book of so-and-so,” then this significantly reduces the authority of the speaker and undermines the credibility of his speech. How can this be? It’s impossible not to use sources at all! Of course not. But, taking into account what has been said, it should be remembered: the source of this or that material should not be recognized - for this it must be appropriately “camouflaged”; if it is not possible to present this or that idea as purely the author’s, or there are doubts that the source will still be identified, then it is better to simply name this source - “Yesterday in Izvestia...”, etc. This way you can prevent “exposure” and insure yourself.
1) Let's imagine people who start building a house in the morning, and the next day, without finishing what they started, they begin building a new house. Such a picture can cause nothing but bewilderment. But this is exactly what people do when they reject the experience of their ancestors and, as it were, begin to build their “home” anew.
2) A person who looks into the distance from a mountain can see more. Likewise, a person who relies on the experience of his predecessors sees much further, and his path to the truth becomes shorter.
3) When a people mocks their ancestors, their worldview, their philosophy, their customs, they are preparing themselves for the same fate. Descendants will grow up and they will laugh at their fathers. But progress does not lie in denying the old, but in creating the new.
4) The arrogant footman Yasha from A. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard” does not remember his mother and dreams of leaving for Paris as soon as possible. He is the living embodiment of unconsciousness.
5) Ch. Aitmatov in the novel “Stormy Stop” tells the legend about the Mankurts. Mankurts are people forcibly deprived of memory. One of them kills his mother, who was trying to free her son from the captivity of unconsciousness. And over the steppe her desperate cry sounds: “Remember your name!”
6) Bazarov, who disdains the “old men”, denies their moral principles, dies from a trifling scratch. And this dramatic ending shows the lifelessness of those who have broken away from the “soil”, from the traditions of their people.
7) The conquerors of antiquity burned books and destroyed monuments in order to deprive the people of historical memory.
8) At one time, the futurists put forward the slogan “Throw Pushkin off the ship of modernity.” But it is impossible to create in emptiness. It is no coincidence that in the work of the mature Mayakovsky there is a living connection with the traditions of Russian classical poetry.
9) During the Great Patriotic War, the film “Alexander Nevsky” was made so that the Soviet people would have spiritual sons and a sense of unity with the “heroes” of the past.
10) The outstanding physicist M. Curie refused to patent her discovery and declared that it belonged to all of humanity. She said that she could not have discovered radioactivity without the great predecessors.
11) Tsar Peter 1 knew how to look far ahead, knowing that future generations would reap the fruits of his efforts. One day Peter, while planting acorns, noticed. as one of the nobles present smiled skeptically. The angry king said: “I understand! Do you think that I will not live to see the mature oak trees. Is it true! But you are a fool; I leave an example for others to do the same, and over time their descendants build ships from them. I’m not working for myself, it’s for the benefit of the state in the future.”
12) When parents do not understand the aspirations of their children, do not understand their life goals, this often leads to an insoluble conflict. Anna Korvin-Krukovskaya, sister of the famous mathematician S. Kovalevskaya, in her youth successfully studied literary creativity. One day she received a favorable review from F. M. Dostoevsky, who offered her cooperation in his magazine. When Anna's father found out that his unmarried daughter was corresponding with a man, he was furious.
“Today you sell your stories, and then you will start selling yourself!” - he attacked the girl.
13) Great Patriotic War a bleeding wound will forever trouble the heart of every person. The siege of Leningrad, in which hundreds of thousands of people died from hunger and cold, became one of the most dramatic pages of our history. An elderly resident of Germany, feeling the guilt of her people towards the dead, left a will to transfer her monetary inheritance to the needs of the Piskarevsky Memorial Cemetery in St. Petersburg.
14) Very often children are ashamed of their parents, who seem ridiculous, out-of-date, and backward to them. One day, in front of a cheering crowd, a wandering jester began to ridicule the young ruler of a small Italian town because his mother was a simple laundress. And what did the angry lord do? He ordered his mother to be killed! Of course, such an act by a young monster will naturally cause indignation in every normal person. But let's look inside ourselves: how often have we felt awkward, annoyed and irritated when our parents allowed themselves to express their opinions in front of our peers?
15) It’s not for nothing that time is called the best judge. The Athenians, not understanding the greatness of the truths discovered by Socrates, condemned him to death. But very little time passed, and people realized that they had killed a man who stood above them in spiritual development. The judges who pronounced the death sentence were expelled from the city, and a bronze monument was erected to the philosopher. And now the name of Socrates has become the embodiment of man’s restless desire for truth and knowledge.
16) One day, one sailor, annoying the entire crew with his playful antics, was washed away by a wave into the sea. He found himself surrounded by a school of sharks. The ship was quickly moving away, there was nowhere to wait for help. Then the sailor, a convinced atheist, remembered a picture from his childhood: his grandmother praying at the icon. He began to repeat her words, crying out to God. A miracle happened: the sharks did not touch him, and four hours later, noticing the sailor was missing, the ship returned for him. After the voyage, the sailor asked the old woman for forgiveness for making fun of her faith as a child.
17) When in 1712 Tsarevich Alexei returned from abroad, where he spent about three years, Father Peter 1 asked him if he had forgotten what he had studied, and immediately ordered him to bring the drawings. Alexey, fearing that his father would force him to make a drawing in his presence, decided to avoid the exam in the most cowardly way. He “intended to ruin his right hand” with a shot in the palm. He lacked the determination to seriously carry out his intention, and the matter was limited to a burn on his hand. The simulation nevertheless saved the prince from the exam.
18) A Persian legend tells of an arrogant sultan who, while hunting, was separated from his servants and, getting lost, came across a shepherd’s hut. Exhausted by thirst, he asked for a drink. The shepherd poured water into a jug and handed it to the bishop. But the Sultan, seeing the nondescript vessel, knocked it out of the shepherd’s hands and angrily exclaimed:
I have never drunk from such vile jugs. The broken vessel said:
Ah, Sultan! It’s in vain that you disdain me! I am your great-grandfather, and I was once, like you, a sultan. When I died, I was buried in a magnificent tomb, but time turned me into dust, which mixed with clay. The potter, having dug up that clay, made many pots and vessels from it. Therefore, lord, do not despise the simple earth from which you came and into which you will someday turn.
When entering into a discussion, we always use a specific strategy appropriate to the situation, sometimes without even thinking about it. Let's look at practical techniques for arguing and expressing your own position: various tips, tried and tested methods, as well as typical mistakes that can arise during negotiations and prevent the successful completion of the discussion.
We all negotiate every day: with friends, work colleagues, acquaintances. Most of the time we don't even realize we're doing it because it's an everyday activity. When entering into a discussion, we always use a specific strategy appropriate to the situation, sometimes without even thinking about it.
For some people, the very fact that the thing they are about to undertake is called "negotiation" makes them nervous and anxious. However, it is possible to develop “immunity” to negotiations as a normal and everyday matter. Below are practical techniques for arguing and expressing your position: various tips, tried and tested methods. This list can be supplemented as communication experience accumulates.
Argumentation tactics
1. The attitude towards your partner should not only be friendly, but also not self-centered. Only with mutual respect and consideration of each other’s interests will communication be truly partnership-based, based on mutual respect and consideration of each other’s interests. Egocentrism prevents this, not allowing a person to change the angle of view when perceiving and assessing events, to see them from different sides and in their entirety. It forces a person to act in his own “coordinate system”, approach his partner’s statements with his own standards, and interpret the information coming from him in a light favorable to himself. The position of a person who communicates in such a manner cannot be called objective, and his arguments cannot be called convincing.
2. You should respect the interlocutor and his position, even if it is unacceptable. Nothing is more destructive to communication than the arrogant and disdainful attitude of partners towards each other. If, in response to his argument, the partner detects a note of irony or contempt in the opponent’s speech, then one can hardly count on a favorable outcome of the conversation.
3. Argumentation should be carried out “on the field” of the interlocutor, that is, work directly with his arguments. Demonstrating their inconsistency or the undesirable consequences of their adoption, one should put forward ones in their place that are more acceptable in the interests of the common cause. This will give a better effect than repeating your own arguments over and over again.
4. It is easier for a convinced person to convince a partner. By defending your point of view, you can quickly influence your interlocutor. In this case, in addition to logic influencing the rational layers of the psyche, the mechanism of emotional infection is activated. Captivated by his idea, a person speaks emotionally and figuratively, which plays an important role in persuasion. Thus, appealing not only to the mind, but also to the heart of the interlocutor gives results. However, excessive emotionality, indicating a lack of logical argumentation, can cause resistance from the opponent.
5. Excitement and agitation during persuasion are interpreted as uncertainty of the persuader, and therefore reduce the effectiveness of argumentation. Outbursts of anger, shouting, and swearing cause a negative reaction from the interlocutor, forcing him to defend himself. The best means are politeness, diplomacy, tact. But at the same time, politeness should not turn into flattery.
6. It is better to begin a phrase of argumentation with a discussion of those issues on which it is easier to reach agreement with the opponent. The more the partner agrees, the greater the chances of achieving the desired result. Only after this should we move on to discussing controversial issues. The main, most powerful arguments should be repeated many times, in different wording and context.
7. Structuring information works effectively: sorting, highlighting primary arguments and organizing them. You can arrange arguments into logical, temporary, and other blocks.
8. It is useful to develop a detailed argumentation plan, taking into account the opponent’s possible counterarguments. Having a plan will help you build the logic of the conversation - the core for your arguments. This will organize the interlocutor’s attention and thinking and make it easier for him to understand his partner’s position.
9. In speech, it is better to use simple, clear expressions, without abusing professional terminology and in foreign words. A conversation can “drown” in a “sea” of vague concepts. Misunderstanding causes irritation and boredom in the interlocutor. It is easy to find a compromise if you take into account the educational and cultural level of your opponent. Using words persistently, firmly and decisively is the tactic of a successful diplomat.
10. Uncertainty and vagueness may be perceived by the interlocutor as insincerity. You should negotiate using reason and a sense of strength, emphasizing confidence in your point of view, but showing respect for the point of view of your opponent.
11. Each new thought should be clothed in a new sentence. The proposals should not be in the form of a telegraphic message, but they should not be drawn out too much either. Extended arguments are usually associated with doubts on the part of the speaker. Short and simple phrases should not be constructed according to the norms literary language, but according to the laws of colloquial speech. The most important points can be highlighted intonationally.
12. The flow of arguments in monologue mode dulls the attention and interest of the interlocutor. Skillfully placed pauses activate them. If it is necessary to emphasize some idea, then it is better to express it after a pause and slightly delay the speech after making the thought public. The partner will be able to take advantage of the timely pause and enter into a conversation, giving his comments. Neutralizing your interlocutor’s claims along the way is much easier than unwinding a tangle of them at the end of the argument. A prolonged pause causes the interlocutor to tense up and fuss internally.
13. The principle of clarity when presenting arguments is very effective. The clarity of the image is facilitated by the activation of the interlocutor’s imagination. For this purpose, it is useful to use vivid comparisons, metaphors, and aphorisms that help reveal the meaning of words and enhance their persuasive effect. The identification of the truth is facilitated by various analogies, parallels, and associations, when they are appropriate and take into account the experience of the interlocutor. Well-chosen examples and facts from life itself will strengthen the arguments. There shouldn’t be many of them, but they should be visual and convincing.
15. You should never tell a person that he is wrong. This will not convince him, but will only hurt his pride, and he will take a position of self-defense. After this, it is unlikely that he will be convinced. It’s better to act more diplomatically: “Perhaps I’m wrong, but let’s see...” This is a good way to offer your interlocutor your argument. It is better to admit your own wrongness immediately and openly, even if it is unprofitable, but in the future you can count on similar behavior from your partner.
16. Honesty or perseverance, gentleness or aggressiveness - a way of behavior in negotiations. This is what people will be prepared for next time and what they will be prepared to deal with. People have long memories, especially when they feel they have been treated unfairly in some way. A person who takes an aggressive approach always tries to get as much as possible from the other party and strives to give as little as possible. The productivity of this approach is the opposite: potential partners are less cooperative and usually will not deal with this person more than once.
16. A rough approach to negotiations produces limited and short-lived results. Pushing or forcing a partner to make a decision can have the opposite effect: the opponent will be stubborn and adamant. Smoothly leading your interlocutor to a decision will undoubtedly require more time, patience and persistence, but this path is more likely to achieve a satisfactory and sustainable result.
17. You should not bet in advance on resolving the problem in your favor. When two people are involved in a discussion, they both feel that they are presented with an opportunity and that they need to get as much as possible from this negotiation. Each person may believe that the truth is on his side, that he is in a better position to justify his proposals or make demands. You may have to defend your point of view in a dispute with a person who negotiates defiantly and rudely. Excessive firmness can interfere with this: it is important to be ready to make concessions in order to achieve the desired result.
18. To overcome negative attitude interlocutor, you can create the illusion that the proposed idea, point of view belongs to him. To do this, it is enough just to point him to the appropriate thought and give him the opportunity to draw a conclusion from it. This is a great way to gain his trust in the proposed idea.
19. You can refute your interlocutor’s remark even before it is made - this will save you from subsequent excuses. However, more often this is done after the statement. You should not retort immediately: this may be perceived by your partner as disrespect for his position. You can postpone your response to comments until a more appropriate moment from a tactical point of view. It is possible that by that time it will have lost its meaning, and then there will be no need to answer it at all.
20. If you need to make critical comments to your opponent, you should remember that the purpose of criticism is to help your interlocutor see the mistake and its possible consequences, and not to prove that he is worse. Criticism should not be directed at the partner’s personality, but at erroneous actions and actions. Criticism should be preceded by recognition of any merits of the partner, this will help get rid of resentment.
21. Instead of expressing your dissatisfaction, it is better to suggest a way to eliminate the error. This can achieve the following:
- take the initiative in choosing means to solve the problem and best protect your interests;
- leave room for further joint activities.
22. To resolve conflicts, it is useful to change the position “me against you” to the position “we are against a common problem.” This approach implies a willingness to negotiate terms, but at the same time it helps to achieve a solution that is as satisfying as possible for both parties.
23. The ability to end a conversation if it has taken an undesirable direction is also of no small importance. You need to know the point at which you should retreat and stop negotiating due to the inability to accept the required conditions.
It may also happen that the result of the negotiations did not meet the expectations of one of the partners. Probably, the reason lies not in the lack of mutual understanding, but in the erroneous tactics of conducting the discussion. Here are a few common mistakes that can occur during negotiations and prevent a successful conclusion of the discussion:
- Improvisation in preparation for a conversation.
- The purpose of the conversation is unclear.
- Poor speech organization.
- Unfounded arguments.
- Lack of attention to detail.
- Lack of sincerity.
- Lack of tact.
- Reassessment of one's own position.
- Disrespect for the position of the interlocutor.
- Reluctance to compromise.
Such mistakes should especially be avoided by those who act in active role. This will help make the argument more convincing, gain the trust of the listener, and appear before him as a whole person.
Alexander Vladimirovich Morozov, Head of the Department of Social Psychology, Institute of the Humanities, Corresponding Member International Academy psychological sciences.
Identification of the author's position is assessed according to the KZ criterion. Let us recall that the author’s position is the conclusion to which the author comes when thinking about a problem. The author's position can be obvious when the text gives a direct assessment of the described facts and events, sounds like a call to the reader. But it often happens that the author’s position is not expressed. Then its identification requires the ability to see the hidden meaning, understand irony, reveal complex metaphors etc. Another difficulty is to distinguish between the position of the author and the hero-narrator. Note that if a hero commits bad deeds or expresses thoughts that contradict generally accepted moral standards, then the author most likely does not approve of such a hero and his attitude to life. Author's position
Model constitutions will help formulate the author's position: The author's position is as follows: ... The author believes that ... The author strives to convey to the reader the idea that ... The author convinces us that ... The text proves the idea that ... The main idea of the text is that... Although the author's position is not expressed explicitly, the logic of the text convinces the reader that...
One of them is the question of harmony. problem For many centuries, humanity has been troubled by many “eternal” questions. One of them is the question of harmony. So, what is harmony and what is the role of this concept in human life and society? Ya. Katin is thinking about this complex problem. It would seem that the author used the word harmony only once. The noun equilibrium is used much more often in the text. However, if at the beginning of the passage we are talking about a sense of balance in the body, then at the end the author writes specifically about harmony - in the spiritual life of a person in society, in nature, in the Universe: “ecologists are concerned about balance on our planet... astrophysicists admire the balance in stellar systems ..." We note with sad surprise that Katin writes with admiration about balance as a comprehensive concept. And we notice with sad surprise that although a person sees harmony and consistency in the life of nature, harmony does not always reign in our spiritual and mental life. And how there is a lack of harmony in today’s world, shaken by political crises and military conflicts! I think I think that the author’s position can be formulated as follows: all living things strive for balance - “a balance of internal and external forces", which helps to survive. Man, like any living organism, is a part of nature, and the natural desire for harmony should guide man and society on the path of truth, justice and goodness. Essay fragment
Attention! IN demo version In 2009, criterion K4 was changed, dedicated to the student’s argumentation of his opinion on the problem. To get maximum points, you must use arguments from scientific, fiction or journalistic literature that demonstrate the student’s erudition and erudition. Argumentation is the presentation of evidence, explanations, examples to substantiate any idea in front of listeners (readers) or an interlocutor. Arguments are evidence given in support of a thesis: facts, examples, statements, explanations - in a word, everything that can confirm the thesis. Thesis in essay on the Unified State Exam is the author's position on the issue under consideration. Arguments should confirm or refute the author's opinion. There are different types of arguments (logical, psychological, illustrative). Argumentation of your own opinion
Types of arguments Logical arguments are arguments that appeal to human reason, to reason. These include: scientific axioms; provisions of laws and official documents; laws of nature, conclusions confirmed experimentally; expert opinions; quotes from authoritative sources; eyewitness testimony; statistics; examples from life or fiction.
Psychological arguments are arguments that evoke certain feelings in the addressee; emotions form a certain attitude towards the person, object, or phenomenon being described. These include: the emotional conviction of the writer; links to authoritative sources (quotes, aphorisms, proverbs); examples that evoke an emotional response from the addressee; an indication of the positive or negative consequences of accepting the author's thesis; appeal to universal human moral values (compassion, conscience, honor, duty, etc.).
Thesis: A person’s speech is an indicator of his intellectual and moral development. Argument 1 Indeed, sometimes speech “tells” more about a person than his face, clothes and much more. Illustrations for argument 1 For example, among my close friends there are no people whose speech is peppered with rude words. I am convinced that every such word carries a “negative charge”. And who would want to hear something offensive to the ears from a loved one? Arguments 2 The rightness of the author is confirmed by the experience of fiction. It is no coincidence that writers have always considered a character's speech as the most important way to reveal his character. Illustrations for argument 2 Let us at least remember Porfiry Golovlev, the hero of the novel by M.E. Saltykova-Shchedrin"Messrs. Golovlevs." Judas (that’s his nickname!) doesn’t use foul language at all; on the contrary, at every step he throws out “affectionate” diminutive words (cabbage, lamp, butter, mamenka). However, throughout his speech, the hypocritical soul of a man for whom there is nothing more valuable than money and property is revealed. Conclusion Thus, nothing characterizes a person better than his speech. Illustrative arguments. An important element of argumentation is illustrations, i.e. examples to support the argument.
Essay fragment I completely agree with the author. Indeed, many books provide insight into complex world human personality. Thus, the greatest Russian writers of the 19th century L.N. Tolstoy and F.M. Dostoevsky created psychologically deep, multifaceted images of heroes in his books, revealing for readers the innermost secrets of the human soul. The spiritual searches and delusions of Rodion Raskolnikov, Pierre Bezukhov, Andrei Bolkonsky are examples of the intense life of the human personality, allowing us to come closer to understanding what a person is, how his soul lives. In addition, books are what unites us all into some cultural community: for example, educated people any country is familiar with the works of Dante, Cervantes, Shakespeare, Dostoevsky - the best books, included in the treasury of human thought. These works constitute the “memory of humanity”, store the lessons of the past, the experience of many generations, allowing us to better understand the world around us and yourself. EXAMPLE 1. Thesis: a book is the most important tool that helps a person to understand the world around him and himself.
Refuting argumentation In refuting argumentation, two options are possible: 1) the student selects two arguments that refute the truth of the author’s position, and in conclusion formulates a counterthesis (a thought opposite to the author’s); 2) formulating his own position on the problem, the student puts forward a counterthesis and proves its truth with two arguments.
Essay fragment I cannot agree with the author. It seems to me that there is no point in contrasting a computer and a book. Firstly, with the advent of computer technology, the book simply took on a new form. For example, electronic media have made books more convenient. Suffice it to remember that the information in thirty volumes of the Bolshoi Soviet encyclopedia Fits on two laser discs! And numerous audiobooks made it possible to hear already well-known and new works performed by professional artists. Secondly, in new form the book has become more accessible. Thanks to the power of the Internet Electronic libraries can be used without leaving home. You can download a fiction or educational book to your phone and read it on the train or subway. And on several disks you can take your entire home library with you! So, an ordinary book and a computer are different shapes storing information, and everyone chooses for themselves the one that suits their habits and needs. EXAMPLE 2. Thesis: a computer cannot replace a book.
Analysis of errors Typical errors of argumentation: the student considers one problem, but gives arguments related to another problem in the text; the thoughts presented are not arguments for the thesis put forward; only examples (often hastily invented) are given as arguments, without explaining their connection with the thesis; in the part of the essay devoted to argumentation, the first and second arguments are not distinguished; there are no transitions between arguments; no output.
Fragments of essays I cannot but agree with the author’s opinion, because the writer’s point of view is expressed quite convincingly. As my own example, I can give the following case: before choosing a serious profession, I think through this decision very carefully, I read a lot of books. (The given example has no relation to the thesis and is not an argument). It seems to me that books will soon disappear because people are reading less. Cinema is what people pay more attention to. But for now, more and more books are being published and new authors are appearing. This means books will bring us more and more joy. (The reasoning not only does not correlate with the thesis, but also reveals an internal contradiction: the last sentence contradicts the first). Firstly, the huge sea of books confronts the young man with the problem of choice. Secondly, I’m even scared to imagine the absence of a literature teacher in my life. Without him, I would never have been able to comprehend a small part of what is contained in classical literature. (The first argument needs an example, an explanation. The second is not related to the thesis). EXAMPLE 3. Thesis: works of mass literature have a destructive effect on the spiritual development of a person.
In my life, I also came across magazines and novels that attracted me with their covers, but as soon as I read them, I was overcome by a feeling of boredom. One day I went to the country and took with me new magazines that I had recently bought. When I started leafing through them and then reading them, I didn’t become interested, I just flipped through the pages. (One may doubt that the described case is a confirmation of the thesis.) I agree with the author's opinion, because in our country there should not be novels and advertising that would turn people's heads. For example, I witnessed such a case. A neighbor lives in the same house with me. He read an advertisement in the newspaper. It said that you could win a car for just a thousand rubles. He fell for this advertisement, sending a thousand rubles, but received nothing in return. He was simply scammed. Therefore, I believe that you cannot trust advertising; it is better not to read it at all. (Substitution of the thesis. The author of the essay deviates from the thesis, arguing about the dangers of advertising. Poor speech is sprinkled with slang words - an ethical mistake). The author, in my opinion, increases this problem. I don’t think that novels and thrillers of this type are harmful to the body, but they can develop people’s fantasies and simply move away from all problems and affairs. (Poor speech, speech errors prevent the author of the essay from correctly expressing his thoughts in the form of a reasonable argument). Unfortunately, examples of arguing one’s own position using references to artistic, scientific or journalistic texts are much less common.
Fragments of essays I completely agree with the author: it is impossible to imagine the life of a society in which there is no sympathy, compassion for one’s neighbor. It was the love of humanity that brilliant Russian writers, such as Leo Tolstoy, taught their readers. Tolstoy's favorite heroes are for real kind and merciful natures. Remember Pierre Bezukhov, who, like the author of the novel “War and Peace,” built schools and hospitals for peasants. Remember Natasha Rostova, who convinces her family to give carts to the wounded. These actions of the heroes are an example of a sincere desire to help people and make the lives of others easier. I am sure that the desire to help someone who is in trouble is a natural need of a normal person. We strive to come to the aid of friends and family who find themselves in difficult situations. Our state and other countries send humanitarian aid to areas affected by natural disasters or military conflicts. All this gives each of us confidence that we are not alone in this world, that the humane element is still alive in man. EXAMPLE 4. Thesis: the ability to sympathize and compassion is the most important quality of a person.
The semantic integrity of the text is determined by how well thought out the composition of the work is. Composition is the structure of an essay, the relationship of its individual parts and the relationship of each part to the entire essay as a single whole. Traditionally, three parts of the essay are distinguished: 1) introduction, in which the problem of the text is usually formulated; 2) the main part, which includes commentary, the author’s position, the writer’s own position and arguments; 3) a conclusion that summarizes the results.
Various composition options are possible. However, it is best to structure the work in accordance with the criteria by which it will be checked: 1) Introduction. 2) Formulation of the problem. 3) Comment. 4) Author's position. 5) Your opinion (agree/disagree with the author’s position). 6) First argument. 7) Second argument. 8) Conclusion. All parts of the work must be interconnected and flow smoothly into one another. To do this, it is necessary to determine the course of development of thought, to think through the logical transitions between parts. Each part should start on a new line. The lack of connections between paragraphs is a typical flaw in essays, for which points are deducted according to the K5 criterion. In addition, to typical mistakes include deviations from the topic, disproportion of parts, violation of the sequence of thoughts, lack of connection between sentences.
Working on the introduction It is important to remember that the main purpose of the introduction is to lead to the formulation of the problem. This can be done in various ways. 1. Problematic question. 1. Problematic question. Can a computer replace a book? This is the problem that attracted the author. General information on the issue under discussion. 2. General information on the problem under discussion. The development of human civilization has long crossed the line beyond which the harmonious coexistence of nature and man remains. Today, when water and air are polluted, rivers dry up, forests disappear, animals die, people look to the future with alarm and are increasingly thinking about the tragic consequences of their activities. The text by V. Peskov is also devoted to the problem of ecology...
Link to an authoritative opinion on an issue close to the issue being discussed 3. Link to an authoritative opinion on an issue close to the issue being discussed. problem. Psychologists say that television addiction is a real disease for many people. modern society. Indeed, it is difficult for each of us to imagine our life without TV. What role does television play in a person’s life? What does TV bring to our home - good and evil? V. Soloukhin thought about this problem. Addressing the reader in order to evoke in his memory certain 4. Appealing to the reader in order to evoke in his memory certain life situations related to the problem of the text. life situations related to the text problem. Have you ever silently walked past unruly young guys swearing in public places? Remember: have you always corrected people who offended someone who was younger or weaker? Of course, in the lives of each of us there were cases when it was necessary to intervene, intercede, help, but we preferred calm inaction. The author raises the problem of people's indifference to the evil around them.
Creating a certain emotional mood. 5. Creating a certain emotional mood. Childhood experiences are probably one of the most precious and significant memories in human life. The places with which the formation of personality is associated remain forever in memory, and more than once we mentally return to this world, colored with bright colors. What role does the memory of one’s home, one’s homeland, play in a person’s life? The author reflects on this problem. Description of feelings, thoughts, impressions that arose after 6. Description of feelings, thoughts, impressions that arose after reading the text. reading text. After reading F. Iskander’s text, I remembered all the best moments of my childhood: trips with friends out of town, victories at sports competitions, summers at a holiday camp... How many bright childhood memories the memory holds! Why is childhood especially significant for a person? What role does childhood play in the lives of each of us? This problem attracted the attention of the author.
A quotation from the source text (or other source) related to the problem under consideration 7. A quotation from the source text (or other source) related to the problem under consideration. problem. "Can you imagine modern world devoid of a printed sign? - writes Yuri Bondarev, inviting his readers to reflect on the problem of the meaning of the book in human life and society. After reading the text by Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev, I involuntarily remembered the famous phrase of Socrates: “Speak so that I can see you,” since the author’s focus is on the problem of speech as a reflection of a person’s personality. Appeal to the facts of the author’s biography, his views, beliefs. 8. Appeal to the facts of the author’s biography, his views, beliefs. Academician Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev, literary critic and public figure, in his speeches and journalistic works always stated that spiritual and material culture- This highest value life. The above text touches on the problem put forward by D.S. Likhachev, - the problem of cultural ecology. In any case, the presentation should not be very voluminous; it should be organically connected with the content of the main part in meaning and stylistically.
Working on the conclusion Like the introduction, the conclusion should be organically connected with the main text. Let's look at different ways to write a conclusion. Generalization of the author's main thoughts 1. Generalization of the author's main thoughts is the most typical and logical ending of an essay. Thus. A. Likhanov raises an issue that is important for each of us, calls for preserving childhood in the soul, not leaving a joyful, childlike perception of life in the past. But the world around us is truly beautiful. It's just that as people grow up, they often forget about this. Interrogative sentence, including a rhetorical question, 2. An interrogative sentence, including a rhetorical question, at the end of an essay also returns the reader to the problem of the text, emphasizing its relevance. Fiction gives us countless treasures of the human spirit! Does any of us have the right to refuse this priceless gift?
3. Appeal, appeal to the reader. 3. Appeal, appeal to the reader. So, before you turn on the TV and immerse yourself in a wonderful, but unreal world, think about whether there are people around you who need consolation, help, or just a kind, living word. Remember: you are surrounded by a genuine world, full of sounds, colors, sensations. Think: who do you want to be - the creator of your life or just a spectator? 4.Use of quotation. 4. Using a quote. In conclusion, I want to turn again to the thought of the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates. So, talk to me, my new interlocutor, so that I can see you, so that I understand what kind of person you are and what I can expect from you! It should be remembered that not every quote will be appropriate in the conclusion. This should be a statement that sufficiently fully expresses the thoughts of the author. It is appropriate to use a small fragment that contains key words from the text or quotes from another source that accurately reflect the position of the author of the source text.
According to the K7-K12 criteria, the literacy of the essay is assessed - compliance with language norms. Of course, the work must be written correctly. It is noteworthy that many errors (especially punctuation) can be explained by haste when copying into a clean copy, so it is important to correctly rewrite into a clean copy, so it is important to correctly allocate the time allotted for the exam. Typically, test authors advise spending 1.5 hours to complete the test part and the same amount to work on the essay. I think that a well-prepared student to perform test tasks minutes are enough. The remaining time should be devoted to the creative part.
Factual errors Separately, it should be said about factual errors - distortion of information about events, objects, persons mentioned in the text of the essay. The following types of factual errors are usually encountered: 1. Distortion of facts contained in the text; 2. Incorrect characterization of the example, phenomenon discussed in the text; 3. Incorrect presentation of facts not mentioned in the source text, which students use in a detailed answer (biographical facts of the author or hero of the text, last name dates, authorship of the named works, etc.). As we can see, the main reasons for the appearance of factual errors are inattentive reading of the source text, as well as the student’s narrow-mindedness.
To summarize, you can give students a few useful tips. 1. You should not rewrite sentences from task B8, devoted to the means of expressiveness of the source text. Remember that the text of this assignment is printed in the materials for essay reviewers, and rewritten sentences are excluded from the word count (the recommended length of the essay is at least 150 words). there is no need to specifically analyze the means of expression used in the text (especially since this has already been done in task B8). In the commentary you can pay attention to particularly striking and persistently repeated language means, drawing the reader’s attention to the main thoughts of the text, however, a simple listing of the techniques used by the author (“the author skillfully uses series of homogeneous members”, etc.) not only does not decorate the work, but also violates the logic of the development of thought.
3. Check if you have written down the author's last name correctly. Unfortunately, the names of even famous writers and publicists are often distorted in their essays. 4. Be careful when determining the genre of the text: do not rush to call it a “story” or “article”, since you can assume the text, fragment, excerpt. actual error. It is better to use the words text, fragment, excerpt. 5. When formulating a problem and the author’s position, try to avoid complex author’s metaphors. It is better to express the corresponding thoughts in your own words. 6. It is not necessary to indicate the style of speech to which the text belongs. Typically sentences like Text refer to journalistic style, as they say, “hang in the air”, remain unconnected with the subsequent thoughts of the essay. Much less common are justified references to the style of speech, when the stylistic form of the text is associated with its The author does not accidentally turn to the journalistic style, because the content: The author does not accidentally turn to the journalistic style, because he is concerned about this social problem, How…
7. If you use the author’s neologism, be sure to enclose it in quotation marks, otherwise in your text this word will look like a grammatical error. 8. Observe ethical standards: do not use rude, abusive, slang words(I don’t understand how you can lead to such nonsense (I don’t understand how you can lead to such nonsense, etc.), refrain from (I can give an example of my classmate, who is distinguished by rare insults (I can give an example of my classmate, who is different rare stupidity), stupidity), do not be too categorical, arrogant, do not brag. Remember that ethical correctness is assessed separately by the expert only in black gel 9. Write your essay carefully, in legible handwriting and only in black gel paste. . Text written with a ballpoint pen is lost during scanning.
