How to stage an argument
“Arguments”
• What do you hear when
you hear this word?
• Other metaphors:
• Argument as ‘making a
case’ (judicial)
• Argument as construction
of building or bridge
(logical)
• Argument as common
task, dialogue or journey
(cooperative)
• What makes a good
argument good?
What are academic arguments for?
• Not so good uses… and
necessary uses…
• Contributing to a
tradition of
inquiry/practice
• By addressing a problem
or gap
• Argument as means of
testing ways forward:
• act of responsibility and
dialogue
Arguments in research
• Thesis: answer to your
research questions
• Need to persuade others
• Marshal your findings,
analysis, exegesis, data to
this end
• Sketch and revise your
thesis and your argument
• Look at it from another’s
perspective
• Giving papers and asking
questions
Task: with your neighbour(s)
• The postcard (or post-it)
challenge:
• What’s your thesis (at
the moment)?
Constructing arguments
• The steps of the argument are the
components of your structure:
• each chapter, each section, each paragraph
moves the reader toward your conclusion.
• Arguments vary in form by discipline, field,
subject, thesis.
• You need to find the right shape, with the
right working parts, for your thesis.
• Easier to do on the smaller scale…
Case study: Robert Bellah, Civil
Religion in America, 1967
Thesis:
• That there is such a thing as an
elaborate and wellinstitutionalized civil religion in
America,
• alongside and clearly
differentiated from the churches,
• and that this religious dimension
‘has its own seriousness and
integrity and requires the same
care in understanding that any
other religion does.’
Argument:
1. Initial evidence: reading of JFK
inaugural 1961
2. Form substantiated from history
of civil religion in US
– Founding Fathers/Revolution
– Civil War
– WWI
3.
Assessment of state today:
– Genuinely religious…& vital
– Secures peaceful coexistence of
church and state
– Dangers of distortion re world
affairs (cf Vietnam)
– Crisis of theological meaning
4.
Conclusion: Third trial needing
fresh international symbols
Some other short shapes
Historical: Igbo Esperanto
• Problem: Union Bible failed as
translation for Igbo – why?
• Proposed solns: Composition of
dialects? Imperial arrogance of
missonary? Suppression of
indigenous agency?
• Thesis: translation paradigm as
key
• Narrative reconstruction of
– motives for key decisions,
– translation practices and
– Early reception, shows:
• Conclusion: key factor was
paradigm of one nation, one
language
Exegetical/theological: boldness and
reserve in Gregory Nazianzen
•
•
•
•
1.
2.
3.
4.
•
Problem: why is Gregory both bold and
reserved in talking of the Trinity?
Thesis: Makes sense in light of his a/c of
theological language
Problem demonstrated
Explanation:
Reserve because theological language
is imperfect: embodiment
Boldness since theology is work of
imagination to grasp what we can
(This is a plausible reading, see
philosophical background on
imagination)
Why then theological language?
Sanctification
Conclusion: a consistent account which
explains his practice.
Larger scale = greater challenge to focus on argument
Longer argument through case studies
• C of E politics re sex and
gender in early C20th shows
capacity for negotiating new
understandings alongside
conservative reactions
• Shown through several case
studies:
–
–
–
–
marriage and equality,
women religious,
sex & suffrage,
contraception, homosexuality
• Conclusion draws out key
factors and wider
significance
Using ideas in dialogue
• Problem: interpersonal
harm and theology
• Rahner’s anthropology
• Challenge of loss of
agency in traumatised
• Limitations and insights of
Butler and Meyer
• How Rahner can help give
account of freedom here
• Ethical consequences
Using ethnography to address problem
• Problem: both 3rd wave
feminist and feminist theology
weakened by lack of
interaction
• Thesis: Ethnography of
women spiritual readers
shows them embodying 3rd
wave theory
• Method: reader-centred
feminist research
• Context: the two movements
explained
• Thesis shown through
thematic analyses of data
• Drawn together in conclusion
Stage your argument
• Frame
• Scenery
• Dramatis
personae
• The shape of
the action – the
‘argument’
• Resolution
Structure
Data----------------- (Qualified) Conclusion
Warrant
backing
Objection
Rebuttal
Task: with your neighbour(s)
• Elevator pitch:
• How would you sum up
the shape of your
argument as you see it
now?
• Questions?