using premises to support or defense a thesis is

How To Create Rock Solid Arguments In Your Dissertation, Thesis Or Assignments

The 6 essential ingredients (with examples).

By: Derek Jansen | August 2017

Arguments happen all the time and that’s okay.

Whether we realise it or not, we have arguments every day. We may quarrel with a significant other over dirty dishes, disagree with an acquaintance over a political hot topic, or even argue with ourselves over the fact that we procrastinate too much. On a more serious note, we also face arguments in our professional and academic lives. For example:

• We debate in class or write assignments on how a company should resolve a particular crisis
• We propose and defend our theses, both orally and written
• We give a presentation to our boss(es) on how best to target a specific market segment

The point with arguments is that we try to convince someone (or ourselves) that we are right . So why don’t we always win our arguments? The art of persuasion is not a natural gift to all of us (it definitely isn’t for me). I’ve learned that I can’t stand on my passion and beliefs alone; I need cold hard facts to back me up.

This blog post will not make you an expert (and I do not claim to be an expert) at argument, but it will provide you with a framework and checklist to help you build strong arguments within your assignments, exams and dissertation or thesis. After all, strong, rigorous arguments are a mainstay of mark-earning work.

So, what do you need in an argument?

A strong argument has six essential ingredients:

• A clear, well-communicated objective/conclusion
• Premise(s) backed by relevant evidence
• Sound logic
• Clear qualifications
• Acknowledgement of counter-arguments
• Emotion and energy

Ingredient #1:

A clearly stated objective or conclusion.

First, an argument, just like any other assignment or research project, will go nowhere without an objective or conclusion. If you do not have a clear focus, you risk confusing yourself, your audience, and your marker. Therefore, you need to ensure that you are very clear about the point you are trying to make (your conclusion or objective). Sounds simple, but you’d be amazed just how many students are unclear about what their point is and, consequently, end up going nowhere slowly.

Throughout this post, I’ll use the example of Company X and its Product Z:

• Company X’s Product Z had great success in the UK, with over 100% ROI within the first two quarters.
• Strong demand for a product like Product Z exists in Germany, France, and Spain.
• Market competition Product Z is relatively low in the targeted European countries.
• Therefore, Company X will most likely launch product Z in Germany, France, and Spain.

The objective of my argument is to convince you that Company X will most likely successfully launch product Z in the targeted European countries. With this conclusion in focus, I will be able to identify and weigh my strategic options, and then articulate the best way to achieve the objective.

So, the ultimate goal of the argument is to convince someone to agree with your conclusion… but why? Why are you trying to change someone’s mind? It’s not just to get great marks. You must have reasons for your conclusion – these reasons are called premises .

Ingredient #2:

Well-grounded premises.

Once you have your objective, you need to clearly communicate your premises. Premises are the building blocks that underpin your conclusion (objective); they provide evidence to lead the audience to agree with your conclusion (Side note: I use proof and premise as synonyms so that I remember the importance of including premises in my arguments). While there can only be one conclusion in an argument, there can be one or (ideally) many premises to support the conclusion. For example, in the case of Company X and Product Z: the two premises are that demand exists in these target countries, and market competition is relatively low.

Great premises have (at least) two requirements:

• They must be backed by credible, verifiable data; and
• They must be relevant to the conclusion.

Data trumps gut

Strong arguments are not based on gut instinct. An argument without data-backed premises is, by definition, baseless. Let’s return to the above example: Demand exists in these target countries, and market competition is relatively low. To make these great premises, I need to add credible data points.

For example:

• An independent consulting firm conducted a market research study of 6,000 people in the targeted countries, and results revealed that high demand exists for a product like Product Z.
• The data collected from an independent consulting firm is a verifiable, citable source. Always double check your sources to make sure you understand and defend them.

Remember, data may not always come from an independent source – it may be outsourced/sponsored by a company, or a company may have an internal research arm. Be ready to ensure the credibility of the information if/when you are asked.

• IBISWorld’s latest industry report shows that market competition Product Z is relatively low in the targeted European countries.
• IBISWorld is a well-recognized provider of industry information and may be a source that your marker recommended. Similar to the point above, this data point is credible and can easily be verified.

To gather information, I suggest you prioritize using class- or school-prescribed sources first; use additional sources to complement, not replace, the class recommended sources.

Relevance is essential

While your premises must be data-backed, they must also be relevant to your conclusion. In other words, relevant premises have evidence that is clearly and logically linked to your conclusion. Be wary of following into the “my premise is true so it must be relevant” trap. If a premise is deemed irrelevant, your argument loses weight because you appear to lose focus.

For example: Company X recently built a state-of-the-art manufacturing facility in the United States.

Your marker will ask: how is this a manufacturing facility in the US connected to your conclusion? The answer is, that premise does not connect. Yes, it is true, but it does not seem logical that a manufacturing facility is strategically linked to a product launch in Europe. Use logic to make sure that your premises are relevant.

Need a helping hand?

Ingredient #3:

Ensuring that your arguments are underpinned by firm logic is… logical. You want to convince your audience, so you need to make sense when building and stating your argument. When making your argument, select your line of reasoning: deductive or inductive.

When making your argument, select your line of reasoning: deductive or inductive. Logically (pun intended), sound deductive reasoning means that your conclusion can be deducted from your valid premises; cogent inductive reasoning means that your conclusion can be inferred from your strong premises.

Deductive reasoning

In deductive reasoning, the premises are a series of consequential statements that lead to the conclusion. To form a conclusion through deduction, you use general premises to point to a specific conclusion. Deductive reasoning is typically focused on the past or present: the general premises have been tested and lead to a specific past or present conclusion.

To identify if an argument is sound, you first check whether the argument is valid. Then, assess if the premises are true or false. Here is an example of deductive reasoning:

• Premise : Most tech companies have a Chief Innovation Officer.
• Premise : Company X is a tech company.
• Conclusion : We may conclude that Company X has a Chief Innovation Officer.

In the above example, the premises start general and then get more specific as they get to the conclusion. Deductive arguments are classified as valid or invalid and deemed to be sound or unsound. To check the validity of the argument, ask this question:

Assuming that the premises are true, does it logically follow that this conclusion is also true?

If the answer is yes, like with the example above, then the argument is valid. It is important to note that the premises do not actually have to be true in order for an argument to be valid. For example, Company X could actually be a healthcare company. However, the argument is still valid because it makes sense that if Company X were hypothetically a tech company, it makes sense that it would have a CIO.

To see if the argument is sound, next check to see if the premises are actually true. An argument is not sound if it is based on false premises. Since in our example we have maintained that Company X is a tech company, we know that premise to be true. Based on other information, we also know that most tech companies have a Chief Innovation Officer. We have two true premises, so we have a sound argument. If Company X actually turned out to be a healthcare company, then we would have one false premise. The argument is therefore unsound because it is based on a false premise.

Inductive reasoning

Inductive reasoning is the opposite of deductive reasoning: specific premises infer a general conclusion. Inductive reasoning is typically geared towards conclusions that will happen in the future. In other words, the conclusion is a prediction that will be tested through future observation. The example we have been using throughout this post is an example of inductive reasoning:

• Premise : Company X’s Product Z had great success in the UK, with over 100% ROI within the first two quarters.
• Premise : An independent consulting firm conducted a survey of 6,000 people in Germany, France, and Spain, revealing a strong demand for Product Z.
• Premise : IBISWorld’s latest industry report shows that market competition Product Z is relatively low in the targeted European countries.
• Conclusion : Therefore, Company X will most likely successfully launch product Z in Germany, France, and Spain.

Inductive arguments are classified as strong or weak and deemed to be cogent or uncogent. In terms of the strength of an inductive argument, there is a little more grey area than when gauging the validity of a deductive argument. The validity of a deductive argument is pretty clear-cut: you assess if a conclusion from the past or present is either true or false. However, in an inductive argument, the conclusion is a prediction, so you cannot be 100% sure if it is actually true or false. Therefore, you ask:

Assuming that the premises are true, is there more than a 50% chance that the conclusion will actually happen?

If the answer is yes, like in the example above, then the argument is strong.

Just as with deductive arguments, the next step in assessing an inductive argument is evaluating the truth of its premises. A true premise is backed up with data. For example, in the above argument, the premises contain data. If, after verification that the data is true, then the argument is cogent. If it turns out that the data is false – for example, if market research reveals that there is not much demand for Product Z, then the argument is not cogent.

Pro tip: Look at the argument’s premise and conclusion indicator words to identify if or inductive reasoning was used. Words that refer to the past or present are used in deductive reasoning; words that refer to the future, or form a hypothesis , are used in inductive reasoning.

That was a lot of information to throw at you. Here are the main points to take away:

• In deductive reasoning, validity and soundness are different concepts. Validity refers to the feasibility of the conclusion; soundness refers to the truthfulness of the premises.
• In inductive reasoning, strength and cogency are different concepts. Strength refers to the feasibility of the conclusion; cogency refers to the truthfulness of the premises.

Ingredient #4:

The conclusions you draw in your argument are not universally applicable (surprise!); there will typically be limitations to the generalisability of your argument – in other words, it will not necessarily be a sound argument in all contexts (in fact, very little is every universally true or relevant). For example, it may only be true in a certain country, for certain people, in a specific organisation, at a certain time of year, etc.

Before finalising your assignment or dissertation and concluding that you have solved the world’s problems, consider the situations in which your arguments might not work. In doing so, you identify your argument’s qualifications.

Remember to use qualifying indicator words (such as “in many cases”, “most”, “predictably”) to help explain your conclusion. For example:

• Premise: Company X’s Product Z had great success in the UK, with over 100% ROI within the first two quarters.
• Premise: An independent consulting firm conducted a survey of 6,000 people in Germany, France, and Spain, revealing a strong demand for Product Z.
• Premise: IBISWorld’s latest industry report shows that market competition Product Z is relatively low in the targeted European countries.
• Conclusion: Therefore, Company X will most likely successfully launch product Z in Germany, France, and Spain.
• Qualification: However, Company X must consider cultural and importation barriers that can hinder the success of Product Z’s expansion.

Ingredient #5:

Acknowledgement of the counter-arguments.

Similarly to qualifying your argument, a good argument needs to anticipate the opposition. There will almost always be counter-arguments to any argument – very little is cut and dry. Therefore, analysing and addressing counter-arguments shows the marker that you have put in considerable time and thought to develop the best scenario.

Additionally, if you have a strong defence against an opposing view, you may very well be likely to turn naysayers into advocates. Potential challenges you can anticipate and address are:

• A different conclusion may be drawn using your own premises
• A question of the importance or validity of your premises
• There may be significant drawbacks to your conclusion

You have some options in addressing counter-arguments:

• Point out and prove errors in the counter-argument.
• Acknowledge the strength or validity of the counter-argument, but show why it is not as strong or valid as your original argument, or within your particular context (i.e. a specific industry or country)
• If the counter-argument points a flaw in one aspect of your conclusion, rewrite your conclusion in a more detailed manner.

Here’s an example:

• Counter argument: Product Z will face tremendous cultural and financial barriers if launched across Europe.
• Response to counter-argument: The launch will occur in phases. Company X will first beta test Product Z in order to understand how to tailor the product and better understand how to import and market the product.

Ingredient #6: Emotion and energy

Lastly, arguments need to do demonstrate a level of emotion in order to be convincing. This might seem contradictory to my previous point about arguments needing to be built on data-backed premises, but it’s not. Simply put, your argument needs to be fueled by data and demonstrated and communicated with emotion and energy.

 Imagine standing up in front of your class and just saying, “We need to implement strategy X because we will increase our market share.” without intonation. No matter how great your prepared argument is, you will lose the attention of your audience if you do not exhibit emotion and energy. We’ve all had that one lecturer who drones on and on, and we quickly lose interest in the subject. Don’t be like that lecturer. Be you. I’m not saying to gesticulate wildly and shout at top volume; it is possible to be poised and passionate at the same time.

Remember: emotion can also be felt in writing. Think of your favorite author, journalist, or researcher. How does she write? She must show emotion in her writing in order to keep you engaged. Try to channel that passion/emulate her writing to make sure that your voice can be heard in your writing.

Wrapping up

In this post, I have discussed six elements of a good argument. Build your arguments using these ingredients and you will no doubt improve the quality of your academic work.

Here’s the checklist for quick reference – a good argument should have:

These elements will help you convey to your marker an articulate, sensible argument that was created after the consideration of several scenarios.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

I’ve never come across a much simpler explanation of the Inductive and Deductive concept. Thanks for this.

I concur. I love it when things are written in understandable language.

I enjoyed this article! Easily understandable.

Glad to hear that, Georgios!

This article is so helpful for me who is ready to write my postgrad dissertation! Thank you!

Great to hear that, Lizzy. Good luck with your dissertation!

Straightforward and to the point! I like that, especially since I don’t have time to beat around the bush.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• Forgot your Password?

First, please create an account

Supporting an argumentative thesis.

1. Thesis Development

Remember that a thesis is a single sentence that expresses the controlling idea of a written work. In other words, the thesis is the core of the essay. It guides the goals and structure of the work by letting the reader know what the writer will be discussing in the body paragraphs, and in what order.

Also remember that there is a significant difference between a thesis and a topic. A topic is the broad subject of a written work and can include multiple thesis statements. The thesis is a focused point or argument about something within the topic.

IN CONTEXT Suppose you were assigned the topic of pet ownership. You wouldn't be able to write an essay based on that topic—it's too broad. First, you must decide which aspect of pet ownership you want to write about or communicate to readers. You might, for example, make the following statement: Although many people assume that owning a pet is easy, it actually comes with a great deal of responsibility, such as grooming, feeding, and training. Here's another option: Due to their companionship, understanding nature, and ability to help during emergencies, pets can fit the definition of lifesavers. As you can see, these two thesis statements are very different and are only related through their very broad shared topic of pet ownership.

Once you've selected a topic and a thesis, you must support the thesis by developing your ideas effectively. This is accomplished through a process of clearly articulating your ideas and supporting them with evidence and reasoning throughout the essay.

So, when writers refer to development, they're not only referring to development of the essay as a whole, but also to the process that takes place at the paragraph level. Paragraphs function like mini essays: Each of them contains their own main ideas, topic sentences, and support.

2. Main Ideas and Claims

To effectively state and support a thesis, most essays must also promote related points—points that, together, prove or support the thesis. Recall that, in writing, these are called main ideas. A main idea is a point or concept that drives one or more body paragraphs of an essay. Each main idea in an essay should contribute to, or support, the thesis statement in some way.

A claim is a type of main idea in which the writer makes a statement that must be defended. A claim is an assertion made by the writer. The thesis statement is thus the primary claim of the essay—the object of all of the essay's support, ideas, and evidence.

A main idea, when coupled with a claim, is usually the controlling idea of the paragraph. When working on the level of the paragraph, the main idea and the controlling idea are synonymous.

hint A controlling idea is the core idea that drives the writing's goals and structure. Note that consecutive paragraphs will sometimes focus on one controlling idea. This can be a sign of a complex and fully realized main idea. Don't worry if you find this happening in your writing.

terms to know Main Idea In writing, a point or concept that drives one or more body paragraphs of an essay. Claim A type of main idea in which the writer makes a statement that must be defended.

3. Evidence and Support

The thesis statement is the main point of the essay, so it needs support in order to hold up. Support refers to any evidence, logic, or other technique (e.g., clarification, expansion of ideas) that bolsters an essay's claims. The purpose of support isn't only to prove that a thesis is true, but also to explain or strengthen the essay's main ideas.

• Facts and data
• Personal research
• Citation of the research of others
• Personal experience

Because essays consist of paragraphs that use forms of support to back up the thesis, it's important to consider paragraphs in order to understand the essay as a whole. As mentioned above, paragraphs are like miniature essays that include a topic sentence (i.e., the sentence that states the paragraph's thesis) and support—usually evidence for the topic sentence.

terms to know Support Any evidence, logic, or other technique that bolsters an essay's claims. Evidence Proof of the validity of a claim or claims.

4. Thesis Support in Action

Following are paragraphs from the same essay which demonstrate how an overall thesis might be introduced, developed, and supported. This first paragraph serves as the essay's introduction:

When you think about your goofy pet dog, your lazy house cat, or even your loud pet parrot, you might not consider that they could save your life. Mounting evidence suggests that pets are more than a playful mess to clean up after; they are key to a happy, healthy life. Due to their companionship, understanding nature, and ability to help during emergencies, pets can fit the definition of lifesavers.

The thesis appears as the last sentence of the paragraph: “Due to their companionship, understanding nature, and ability to help during emergencies, pets can fit the definition of lifesavers.”

Because of this thesis, we know that the main point and narrowed-down topic of the essay is that pets are lifesavers, and we know that the main ideas related to that point are companionship, an understanding nature, and ability to help during emergencies. That helps us to figure out what kind of evidence and support may be included in this essay: Perhaps the essay will use data about the health benefits of owning a pet, perhaps it will discuss research from others who have investigated this topic, or perhaps it will include descriptions of personal experience.

Now consider this next paragraph, keeping the essay's thesis in mind as you do:

The companionship of pets offers health benefits, demonstrating the lifesaving qualities of pets. There are all kinds of pets that individuals or families can adopt. Some of the most traditional pets are dogs, cats, birds, rodents (such as hamsters and guinea pigs), and fish. Less common pets include rabbits, small pigs, raccoons, and snakes and other reptiles. Exotic animals might also make excellent pets but may require a special permit and special care. There is an ideal type of pet for each individual or family.

The topic sentence of this is paragraph is “The companionship of pets offers health benefits, demonstrating the lifesaving qualities of pets,” which means that the support in this paragraph should focus on the main idea of companionship mentioned in the thesis. So, is the support here effective for the main idea of the paragraph and the essay's thesis?

No, it is not. All of the sentences that come after the topic sentence are discussing different types of pets that individuals and families can adopt. The author gives examples of different types of pets and simply states that there is an ideal pet for each individual or family. Even though this information is related to the broader topic of pet ownership, it does not belong in this essay. It does not support the idea that the companionship of pets offers health benefits (the main idea of this paragraph), and it does not support the overall claim of the thesis (that pets fit the definition of lifesavers) because it does not address pets' companionship, understanding nature, or ability to help during emergencies.

In order to better support the topic sentence “The companionship of pets offers health benefits, demonstrating the lifesaving qualities of pets,” and to therefore better support the thesis, here is a revised version of this paragraph:

The companionship of pets offers health benefits, demonstrating the lifesaving qualities of pets. Both mental and physical health can improve when owning a pet. Petting or caring for a dog or cat lowers levels of stress and combats loneliness. Dog owners in particular may find themselves socializing more often when taking their dog for walks and to dog parks. In addition, walking a dog can lower blood pressure and decrease the risk of heart disease (Fields, 2013). By improving the health of their owners through companionship, pets improve—and even save—these owners' lives.

In this version of the paragraph, the support provided directly relates to both the topic sentence and thesis. There are facts, such as that petting or caring for a dog or cat lowers levels of stress and combats loneliness, dog owners socialize more, and walking a dog can lower blood pressure and decrease the risk of heart disease. These facts help to support the idea that the companionship offered by pets comes with health benefits.

Additionally, the support in this paragraph supports the thesis, which lists companionship as one of its main ideas.

summary In this lesson, you learned that thesis development is the process in which thesis statements are represented throughout an essay by main ideas and claims , which are in turn backed up by different kinds of support , such as evidence . You then looked at examples of thesis support in action by reading an introductory and body paragraph from a sample essay. Best of luck in your learning!

Source: THIS TUTORIAL WAS AUTHORED BY SOPHIA LEARNING. PLEASE SEE OUR TERMS OF USE .

A type of main idea in which the writer makes a statement that must be defended.

Proof of the validity of a claim or claims.

In writing, a point or concept that drives one or more body paragraphs of an essay.

Any evidence, logic, or other technique that bolsters an essay's claims.

• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Terms of Use

© 2024 SOPHIA Learning, LLC. SOPHIA is a registered trademark of SOPHIA Learning, LLC.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Organizing Your Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

How can I effectively present my argument?

In order for your argument to be persuasive, it must use an organizational structure that the audience perceives as both logical and easy to parse. Three argumentative methods —the  Toulmin Method , Classical Method , and Rogerian Method — give guidance for how to organize the points in an argument.

Note that these are only three of the most popular models for organizing an argument. Alternatives exist. Be sure to consult your instructor and/or defer to your assignment’s directions if you’re unsure which to use (if any).

Toulmin Method

The  Toulmin Method  is a formula that allows writers to build a sturdy logical foundation for their arguments. First proposed by author Stephen Toulmin in  The Uses of Argument (1958), the Toulmin Method emphasizes building a thorough support structure for each of an argument's key claims.

The basic format for the Toulmin Method  is as follows:

Claim:  In this section, you explain your overall thesis on the subject. In other words, you make your main argument.

Data (Grounds):  You should use evidence to support the claim. In other words, provide the reader with facts that prove your argument is strong.

Warrant (Bridge):  In this section, you explain why or how your data supports the claim. As a result, the underlying assumption that you build your argument on is grounded in reason.

Backing (Foundation):  Here, you provide any additional logic or reasoning that may be necessary to support the warrant.

Counterclaim:  You should anticipate a counterclaim that negates the main points in your argument. Don't avoid arguments that oppose your own. Instead, become familiar with the opposing perspective.   If you respond to counterclaims, you appear unbiased (and, therefore, you earn the respect of your readers). You may even want to include several counterclaims to show that you have thoroughly researched the topic.

Rebuttal:  In this section, you incorporate your own evidence that disagrees with the counterclaim. It is essential to include a thorough warrant or bridge to strengthen your essay’s argument. If you present data to your audience without explaining how it supports your thesis, your readers may not make a connection between the two, or they may draw different conclusions.

Example of the Toulmin Method:

Claim:  Hybrid cars are an effective strategy to fight pollution.

Data1:  Driving a private car is a typical citizen's most air-polluting activity.

Warrant 1:  Due to the fact that cars are the largest source of private (as opposed to industrial) air pollution, switching to hybrid cars should have an impact on fighting pollution.

Data 2:  Each vehicle produced is going to stay on the road for roughly 12 to 15 years.

Warrant 2:  Cars generally have a long lifespan, meaning that the decision to switch to a hybrid car will make a long-term impact on pollution levels.

Data 3:  Hybrid cars combine a gasoline engine with a battery-powered electric motor.

Warrant 3:  The combination of these technologies produces less pollution.

Counterclaim:  Instead of focusing on cars, which still encourages an inefficient culture of driving even as it cuts down on pollution, the nation should focus on building and encouraging the use of mass transit systems.

Rebuttal:  While mass transit is an idea that should be encouraged, it is not feasible in many rural and suburban areas, or for people who must commute to work. Thus, hybrid cars are a better solution for much of the nation's population.

Rogerian Method

The Rogerian Method  (named for, but not developed by, influential American psychotherapist Carl R. Rogers) is a popular method for controversial issues. This strategy seeks to find a common ground between parties by making the audience understand perspectives that stretch beyond (or even run counter to) the writer’s position. Moreso than other methods, it places an emphasis on reiterating an opponent's argument to his or her satisfaction. The persuasive power of the Rogerian Method lies in its ability to define the terms of the argument in such a way that:

• your position seems like a reasonable compromise.
• you seem compassionate and empathetic.

The basic format of the Rogerian Method  is as follows:

Introduction:  Introduce the issue to the audience, striving to remain as objective as possible.

Opposing View : Explain the other side’s position in an unbiased way. When you discuss the counterargument without judgement, the opposing side can see how you do not directly dismiss perspectives which conflict with your stance.

Statement of Validity (Understanding):  This section discusses how you acknowledge how the other side’s points can be valid under certain circumstances. You identify how and why their perspective makes sense in a specific context, but still present your own argument.

Statement of Your Position:  By this point, you have demonstrated that you understand the other side’s viewpoint. In this section, you explain your own stance.

Statement of Contexts : Explore scenarios in which your position has merit. When you explain how your argument is most appropriate for certain contexts, the reader can recognize that you acknowledge the multiple ways to view the complex issue.

Statement of Benefits:  You should conclude by explaining to the opposing side why they would benefit from accepting your position. By explaining the advantages of your argument, you close on a positive note without completely dismissing the other side’s perspective.

Example of the Rogerian Method:

Introduction:  The issue of whether children should wear school uniforms is subject to some debate.

Opposing View:  Some parents think that requiring children to wear uniforms is best.

Statement of Validity (Understanding):  Those parents who support uniforms argue that, when all students wear the same uniform, the students can develop a unified sense of school pride and inclusiveness.

Statement of Your Position : Students should not be required to wear school uniforms. Mandatory uniforms would forbid choices that allow students to be creative and express themselves through clothing.

Statement of Contexts:  However, even if uniforms might hypothetically promote inclusivity, in most real-life contexts, administrators can use uniform policies to enforce conformity. Students should have the option to explore their identity through clothing without the fear of being ostracized.

Statement of Benefits:  Though both sides seek to promote students' best interests, students should not be required to wear school uniforms. By giving students freedom over their choice, students can explore their self-identity by choosing how to present themselves to their peers.

Classical Method

The Classical Method of structuring an argument is another common way to organize your points. Originally devised by the Greek philosopher Aristotle (and then later developed by Roman thinkers like Cicero and Quintilian), classical arguments tend to focus on issues of definition and the careful application of evidence. Thus, the underlying assumption of classical argumentation is that, when all parties understand the issue perfectly, the correct course of action will be clear.

The basic format of the Classical Method  is as follows:

Introduction (Exordium): Introduce the issue and explain its significance. You should also establish your credibility and the topic’s legitimacy.

Statement of Background (Narratio): Present vital contextual or historical information to the audience to further their understanding of the issue. By doing so, you provide the reader with a working knowledge about the topic independent of your own stance.

Proposition (Propositio): After you provide the reader with contextual knowledge, you are ready to state your claims which relate to the information you have provided previously. This section outlines your major points for the reader.

Proof (Confirmatio): You should explain your reasons and evidence to the reader. Be sure to thoroughly justify your reasons. In this section, if necessary, you can provide supplementary evidence and subpoints.

Refutation (Refuatio): In this section, you address anticipated counterarguments that disagree with your thesis. Though you acknowledge the other side’s perspective, it is important to prove why your stance is more logical.  

Conclusion (Peroratio): You should summarize your main points. The conclusion also caters to the reader’s emotions and values. The use of pathos here makes the reader more inclined to consider your argument.  

Example of the Classical Method:  

Introduction (Exordium): Millions of workers are paid a set hourly wage nationwide. The federal minimum wage is standardized to protect workers from being paid too little. Research points to many viewpoints on how much to pay these workers. Some families cannot afford to support their households on the current wages provided for performing a minimum wage job .

Statement of Background (Narratio): Currently, millions of American workers struggle to make ends meet on a minimum wage. This puts a strain on workers’ personal and professional lives. Some work multiple jobs to provide for their families.

Proposition (Propositio): The current federal minimum wage should be increased to better accommodate millions of overworked Americans. By raising the minimum wage, workers can spend more time cultivating their livelihoods.

Proof (Confirmatio): According to the United States Department of Labor, 80.4 million Americans work for an hourly wage, but nearly 1.3 million receive wages less than the federal minimum. The pay raise will alleviate the stress of these workers. Their lives would benefit from this raise because it affects multiple areas of their lives.

Refutation (Refuatio): There is some evidence that raising the federal wage might increase the cost of living. However, other evidence contradicts this or suggests that the increase would not be great. Additionally,   worries about a cost of living increase must be balanced with the benefits of providing necessary funds to millions of hardworking Americans.

Conclusion (Peroratio): If the federal minimum wage was raised, many workers could alleviate some of their financial burdens. As a result, their emotional wellbeing would improve overall. Though some argue that the cost of living could increase, the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks.

• U.S. Locations
• UMGC Europe
• Learn Online
• Find Answers
• 855-655-8682
• Current Students

Online Guide to Writing and Research

Other frequently assigned papers, explore more of umgc.

• Online Guide to Writing

Writing Arguments

Steps to Writing an Argument

Develop your argument.

When you develop your argument, you are confirming your own position, and building your case for the readers. Use empirical evidence—facts and statistics—to support your claims. Appeal to your audience’s rational and logical thinking. Argue your case from the authority of your evidence and research.

Your list of strengths and weaknesses can help you develop your argument. Here is how to do that:

First, prioritize the strengths and weaknesses of each position and then decide on the top three to five strengths and weaknesses. 

Then, using a technique for developing content ideas, begin to expand your understanding of each item on your list (see the section in chapter 2 titled “ Techniques to Get Started ”). 

Evaluate each one in terms of how you can support it—by reasoning, providing details, adding an example, or offering evidence. 

Again, prioritize your list of strengths and weaknesses, this time noting the supporting comments that need more work, call for more evidence, or may be irrelevant to your argument. At this stage, it is better to overlook nothing and keep extensive notes for later reference.

As you develop your ideas, remember that you are presenting them in a fair-minded and rational way, counting on your readers’ intelligence, experience, and insight to evaluate your argument and see your point of view.

Techniques for Appealing to Your Readers

The success of your argument depends on your skill in convincing your readers—through sound reasoning, persuasion, and evidence—of the strength of your point of view. But how can you do that in the most effective way? There are three fundamental types of appeal in presenting an argument: reason, ethics, and emotion. As a writer, use all three of these techniques in your writing. 

But let’s learn more about these types of appeal:

Clear thinking requires that you state your claim and support it with concrete, specific facts. This approach appeals to our common sense and rational thinking. 

Formal reasoning involves following certain established logical methods to arrive at certain pieces of information or conclusions. Generally, these logical methods are known as inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning.

What is inductive reasoning? Inductive thinking is when our logical thinking states specific facts (called premises) and then draws a conclusion, or generalization. Inductive reasoning lets us examine the specific details, considering how well they add up to the generalization. When we think inductively, we are asking whether the evidence clearly supports the conclusions.

Example of Inductive Reasoning

Premise: Swans nest near this pond every summer.

Hypothesis: This summer, swans will probably nest near this pond.

What is deductive reasoning? In deductive reasoning, you take two premises to create a conclusion based on reasoning and evidence. When we think logically, we start with the generalization. As we apply our generalization to a specific situation, we examine the individual premises that make that generalization reasonable or unreasonable. When our logical thinking starts with the generalization, or conclusion, we may then apply the generalization to a particular situation to see if that generalization follows from the premises. Our deductive thinking can be expressed as a  syllogism  or an  enthymeme —a shortened form of the syllogism.

Syllogisms can be written like this:

All A are B.

All C are A.

Therefore, all C are B.

Example of Deductive Reasoning Using a Syllogism:

Major premise: All birds have feathers.

Minor premise: A parrot is a bird.

Conclusion: A parrot has feathers.

Enthymemes can be written like this:

If A=B and B=C, then A=C. 

But with enthymemes, B=C is implied.

Example of Deductive Reasoning Using an Enthymeme:

Conclusion: A parrot is a bird.

(We assume that a parrot has feathers)

Think of ethics as the force of a speaker’s character as it is represented in writing. If you misrepresent the evidence of one of your sources, your readers will question your ethics. 

In any situation in which you must rely on your readers’ goodwill and common sense, you will lose their open-minded stance toward your argument if you support it by using unethical methods. This can happen intentionally, by misrepresenting evidence and experts and by seeking to hurt individuals or groups. It can also happen unintentionally—you may undermine your argument by inadvertently misunderstanding the evidence and the implications of your position. This can occur if you don’t research the evidence responsibly, preferring instead to express your own and others’ unfounded opinions.

Using emotions as a support for argument can be tricky. Attempts to play on your readers’ emotions can seem manipulative and are often mistrusted. To use emotional appeal successfully, you must apply discretion and restraint. Choose examples that represent and illustrate your ideas fairly, and then present your arguments as objectively as possible. The writer must carefully draw the connections between the ideas and illustrations, choosing diction in such a way that readers don’t question motives as manipulative. Strong evidence accumulated by careful research often addresses this potential problem well.

Example of an Appeal to Emotion

Rather than continuing these tax-and-spend policies, we plan to return your hard-earned tax money to you.

Mailing Address: 3501 University Blvd. East, Adelphi, MD 20783 This work is licensed under a  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License . © 2022 UMGC. All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity of information located at external sites.

Table of Contents: Online Guide to Writing

Chapter 1: College Writing

How Does College Writing Differ from Workplace Writing?

What Is College Writing?

Why So Much Emphasis on Writing?

Chapter 2: The Writing Process

Doing Exploratory Research

Getting from Notes to Your Draft

Introduction

Prewriting - Techniques to Get Started - Mining Your Intuition

Prewriting: Targeting Your Audience

Prewriting: Techniques to Get Started

Prewriting: Understanding Your Assignment

Rewriting: Being Your Own Critic

Rewriting: Creating a Revision Strategy

Rewriting: Getting Feedback

Rewriting: The Final Draft

Techniques to Get Started - Outlining

Techniques to Get Started - Using Systematic Techniques

Thesis Statement and Controlling Idea

Writing: Getting from Notes to Your Draft - Freewriting

Writing: Getting from Notes to Your Draft - Summarizing Your Ideas

Writing: Outlining What You Will Write

Chapter 3: Thinking Strategies

A Word About Style, Voice, and Tone

A Word About Style, Voice, and Tone: Style Through Vocabulary and Diction

Critical Strategies and Writing

Critical Strategies and Writing: Analysis

Critical Strategies and Writing: Evaluation

Critical Strategies and Writing: Persuasion

Critical Strategies and Writing: Synthesis

Developing a Paper Using Strategies

Kinds of Assignments You Will Write

Patterns for Presenting Information

Patterns for Presenting Information: Critiques

Patterns for Presenting Information: Discussing Raw Data

Patterns for Presenting Information: General-to-Specific Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Problem-Cause-Solution Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Specific-to-General Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Summaries and Abstracts

Supporting with Research and Examples

Writing Essay Examinations

Writing Essay Examinations: Make Your Answer Relevant and Complete

Writing Essay Examinations: Organize Thinking Before Writing

Writing Essay Examinations: Read and Understand the Question

Chapter 4: The Research Process

Planning and Writing a Research Paper

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Ask a Research Question

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Cite Sources

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Collect Evidence

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Decide Your Point of View, or Role, for Your Research

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Draw Conclusions

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Find a Topic and Get an Overview

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Manage Your Resources

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Outline

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Survey the Literature

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Work Your Sources into Your Research Writing

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Human Resources

Research Resources: What Are Research Resources?

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found?

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Electronic Resources

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Print Resources

Structuring the Research Paper: Formal Research Structure

Structuring the Research Paper: Informal Research Structure

The Nature of Research

The Research Assignment: How Should Research Sources Be Evaluated?

The Research Assignment: When Is Research Needed?

The Research Assignment: Why Perform Research?

Chapter 5: Academic Integrity

Academic Integrity

Giving Credit to Sources

Giving Credit to Sources: Copyright Laws

Giving Credit to Sources: Documentation

Giving Credit to Sources: Style Guides

Integrating Sources

Practicing Academic Integrity

Practicing Academic Integrity: Keeping Accurate Records

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Paraphrasing Your Source

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Quoting Your Source

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Summarizing Your Sources

Types of Documentation

Types of Documentation: Bibliographies and Source Lists

Types of Documentation: Citing World Wide Web Sources

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - APA Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - CSE/CBE Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - Chicago Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - MLA Style

Types of Documentation: Note Citations

Chapter 6: Using Library Resources

Finding Library Resources

Chapter 7: Assessing Your Writing

How Is Writing Graded?

How Is Writing Graded?: A General Assessment Tool

The Draft Stage

The Draft Stage: The First Draft

The Draft Stage: The Revision Process and the Final Draft

The Draft Stage: Using Feedback

The Research Stage

Using Assessment to Improve Your Writing

Chapter 8: Other Frequently Assigned Papers

Reviews and Reaction Papers: Article and Book Reviews

Reviews and Reaction Papers: Reaction Papers

Writing Arguments: Adapting the Argument Structure

Writing Arguments: Purposes of Argument

Writing Arguments: References to Consult for Writing Arguments

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Anticipate Active Opposition

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Determine Your Organization

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Develop Your Argument

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Introduce Your Argument

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - State Your Thesis or Proposition

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Write Your Conclusion

Writing Arguments: Types of Argument

Appendix A: Books to Help Improve Your Writing

Dictionaries

General Style Manuals

Researching on the Internet

Special Style Manuals

Writing Handbooks

Appendix B: Collaborative Writing and Peer Reviewing

Collaborative Writing: Assignments to Accompany the Group Project

Collaborative Writing: Informal Progress Report

Collaborative Writing: Issues to Resolve

Collaborative Writing: Methodology

Collaborative Writing: Peer Evaluation

Collaborative Writing: Tasks of Collaborative Writing Group Members

Collaborative Writing: Writing Plan

General Introduction

Peer Reviewing

Appendix C: Developing an Improvement Plan

Working with Your Instructor’s Comments and Grades

Appendix D: Writing Plan and Project Schedule

Devising a Writing Project Plan and Schedule

Reviewing Your Plan with Others

By using our website you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more about how we use cookies by reading our  Privacy Policy .

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to prepare an excellent thesis defense

What is a thesis defense?

How long is a thesis defense, what happens at a thesis defense, your presentation, questions from the committee, 6 tips to help you prepare for your thesis defense, 1. anticipate questions and prepare for them, 2. dress for success, 3. ask for help, as needed, 4. have a backup plan, 5. prepare for the possibility that you might not know an answer, 6. de-stress before, during, and after, frequently asked questions about preparing an excellent thesis defense, related articles.

If you're about to complete, or have ever completed a graduate degree, you have most likely come across the term "thesis defense." In many countries, to finish a graduate degree, you have to write a thesis .

A thesis is a large paper, or multi-chapter work, based on a topic relating to your field of study.

Once you hand in your thesis, you will be assigned a date to defend your work. Your thesis defense meeting usually consists of you and a committee of two or more professors working in your program. It may also include other people, like professionals from other colleges or those who are working in your field.

During your thesis defense, you will be asked questions about your work. The main purpose of your thesis defense is for the committee to make sure that you actually understand your field and focus area.

The questions are usually open-ended and require the student to think critically about their work. By the time of your thesis defense, your paper has already been evaluated. The questions asked are not designed so that you actually have to aggressively "defend" your work; often, your thesis defense is more of a formality required so that you can get your degree.

• Check with your department about requirements and timing.
• Re-read your thesis.
• Anticipate questions and prepare for them.
• Create a back-up plan to deal with technology hiccups.
• Plan de-stressing activities both before, and after, your defense.

How long your oral thesis defense is depends largely on the institution and requirements of your degree. It is best to consult your department or institution about this. In general, a thesis defense may take only 20 minutes, but it may also take two hours or more. The length also depends on how much time is allocated to the presentation and questioning part.

Tip: Check with your department or institution as soon as possible to determine the approved length for a thesis defense.

First of all, be aware that a thesis defense varies from country to country. This is just a general overview, but a thesis defense can take many different formats. Some are closed, others are public defenses. Some take place with two committee members, some with more examiners.

The same goes for the length of your thesis defense, as mentioned above. The most important first step for you is to clarify with your department what the structure of your thesis defense will look like. In general, your thesis defense will include:

• your presentation of around 20-30 minutes
• questions from the committee
• questions from the audience (if the defense is public and the department allows it)

You might have to give a presentation, often with Powerpoint, Google slides, or Keynote slides. Make sure to prepare an appropriate amount of slides. A general rule is to use about 10 slides for a 20-minute presentation.

But that also depends on your specific topic and the way you present. The good news is that there will be plenty of time ahead of your thesis defense to prepare your slides and practice your presentation alone and in front of friends or family.

Tip: Practice delivering your thesis presentation in front of family, friends, or colleagues.

You can prepare your slides by using information from your thesis' first chapter (the overview of your thesis) as a framework or outline. Substantive information in your thesis should correspond with your slides.

Make sure your slides are of good quality— both in terms of the integrity of the information and the appearance. If you need more help with how to prepare your presentation slides, both the ASQ Higher Education Brief and James Hayton have good guidelines on the topic.

The committee will ask questions about your work after you finish your presentation. The questions will most likely be about the core content of your thesis, such as what you learned from the study you conducted. They may also ask you to summarize certain findings and to discuss how your work will contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

Tip: Read your entire thesis in preparation of the questions, so you have a refreshed perspective on your work.

While you are preparing, you can create a list of possible questions and try to answer them. You can foresee many of the questions you will get by simply spending some time rereading your thesis.

Here are a few tips on how to prepare for your thesis defense:

You can absolutely prepare for most of the questions you will be asked. Read through your thesis and while you're reading it, create a list of possible questions. In addition, since you will know who will be on the committee, look at the academic expertise of the committee members. In what areas would they most likely be focused?

If possible, sit at other thesis defenses with these committee members to get a feel for how they ask and what they ask. As a graduate student, you should generally be adept at anticipating test questions, so use this advantage to gather as much information as possible before your thesis defense meeting.

Your thesis defense is a formal event, often the entire department or university is invited to participate. It signals a critical rite of passage for graduate students and faculty who have supported them throughout a long and challenging process.

While most universities don't have specific rules on how to dress for that event, do regard it with dignity and respect. This one might be a no-brainer, but know that you should dress as if you were on a job interview or delivering a paper at a conference.

It might help you deal with your stress before your thesis defense to entrust someone with the smaller but important responsibilities of your defense well ahead of schedule. This trusted person could be responsible for:

• preparing the room of the day of defense
• setting up equipment for the presentation
• preparing and distributing handouts

Technology is unpredictable. Life is too. There are no guarantees that your Powerpoint presentation will work at all or look the way it is supposed to on the big screen. We've all been there. Make sure to have a plan B for these situations. Handouts can help when technology fails, and an additional clean shirt can save the day if you have a spill.

One of the scariest aspects of the defense is the possibility of being asked a question you can't answer. While you can prepare for some questions, you can never know exactly what the committee will ask.

There will always be gaps in your knowledge. But your thesis defense is not about being perfect and knowing everything, it's about how you deal with challenging situations. You are not expected to know everything.

James Hayton writes on his blog that examiners will sometimes even ask questions they don't know the answer to, out of curiosity, or because they want to see how you think. While it is ok sometimes to just say "I don't know", he advises to try something like "I don't know, but I would think [...] because of x and y, but you would need to do [...] in order to find out.” This shows that you have the ability to think as an academic.

You will be nervous. But your examiners will expect you to be nervous. Being well prepared can help minimize your stress, but do know that your examiners have seen this many times before and are willing to help, by repeating questions, for example. Dora Farkas at finishyourthesis.com notes that it’s a myth that thesis committees are out to get you.

Two common symptoms of being nervous are talking really fast and nervous laughs. Try to slow yourself down and take a deep breath. Remember what feels like hours to you are just a few seconds in real life.

• Try meditational breathing right before your defense.
• Get plenty of exercise and sleep in the weeks prior to your defense.
• Have your clothes or other items you need ready to go the night before.
• During your defense, allow yourself to process each question before answering.
• Go to dinner with friends and family, or to a fun activity like mini-golf, after your defense.

Allow yourself to process each question, respond to it, and stop talking once you have responded. While a smile can often help dissolve a difficult situation, remember that nervous laughs can be irritating for your audience.

We all make mistakes and your thesis defense will not be perfect. However, careful preparation, mindfulness, and confidence can help you feel less stressful both before, and during, your defense.

Finally, consider planning something fun that you can look forward to after your defense.

It is completely normal to be nervous. Being well prepared can help minimize your stress, but do know that your examiners have seen this many times before and are willing to help, by repeating questions for example if needed. Slow yourself down, and take a deep breath.

Your thesis defense is not about being perfect and knowing everything, it's about how you deal with challenging situations. James Hayton writes on his blog that it is ok sometimes to just say "I don't know", but he advises to try something like "I don't know, but I would think [...] because of x and y, you would need to do [...] in order to find out".

Your Powerpoint presentation can get stuck or not look the way it is supposed to do on the big screen. It can happen and your supervisors know it. In general, handouts can always save the day when technology fails.

• Dress for success.
• Ask for help setting up.
• Have a backup plan (in case technology fails you).
• Deal with your nerves.

Developing a Thesis Statement

Many papers you write require developing a thesis statement. In this section you’ll learn what a thesis statement is and how to write one.

Keep in mind that not all papers require thesis statements . If in doubt, please consult your instructor for assistance.

What is a thesis statement?

A thesis statement . . .

• Makes an argumentative assertion about a topic; it states the conclusions that you have reached about your topic.
• Makes a promise to the reader about the scope, purpose, and direction of your paper.
• Is focused and specific enough to be “proven” within the boundaries of your paper.
• Is generally located near the end of the introduction ; sometimes, in a long paper, the thesis will be expressed in several sentences or in an entire paragraph.
• Identifies the relationships between the pieces of evidence that you are using to support your argument.

Not all papers require thesis statements! Ask your instructor if you’re in doubt whether you need one.

Identify a topic

Your topic is the subject about which you will write. Your assignment may suggest several ways of looking at a topic; or it may name a fairly general concept that you will explore or analyze in your paper.

Consider what your assignment asks you to do

Inform yourself about your topic, focus on one aspect of your topic, ask yourself whether your topic is worthy of your efforts, generate a topic from an assignment.

Below are some possible topics based on sample assignments.

Sample assignment 1

Analyze Spain’s neutrality in World War II.

Identified topic

Franco’s role in the diplomatic relationships between the Allies and the Axis

This topic avoids generalities such as “Spain” and “World War II,” addressing instead on Franco’s role (a specific aspect of “Spain”) and the diplomatic relations between the Allies and Axis (a specific aspect of World War II).

Sample assignment 2

Analyze one of Homer’s epic similes in the Iliad.

The relationship between the portrayal of warfare and the epic simile about Simoisius at 4.547-64.

This topic focuses on a single simile and relates it to a single aspect of the Iliad ( warfare being a major theme in that work).

Developing a Thesis Statement–Additional information

Your assignment may suggest several ways of looking at a topic, or it may name a fairly general concept that you will explore or analyze in your paper. You’ll want to read your assignment carefully, looking for key terms that you can use to focus your topic.

Sample assignment: Analyze Spain’s neutrality in World War II Key terms: analyze, Spain’s neutrality, World War II

After you’ve identified the key words in your topic, the next step is to read about them in several sources, or generate as much information as possible through an analysis of your topic. Obviously, the more material or knowledge you have, the more possibilities will be available for a strong argument. For the sample assignment above, you’ll want to look at books and articles on World War II in general, and Spain’s neutrality in particular.

As you consider your options, you must decide to focus on one aspect of your topic. This means that you cannot include everything you’ve learned about your topic, nor should you go off in several directions. If you end up covering too many different aspects of a topic, your paper will sprawl and be unconvincing in its argument, and it most likely will not fulfull the assignment requirements.

For the sample assignment above, both Spain’s neutrality and World War II are topics far too broad to explore in a paper. You may instead decide to focus on Franco’s role in the diplomatic relationships between the Allies and the Axis , which narrows down what aspects of Spain’s neutrality and World War II you want to discuss, as well as establishes a specific link between those two aspects.

Before you go too far, however, ask yourself whether your topic is worthy of your efforts. Try to avoid topics that already have too much written about them (i.e., “eating disorders and body image among adolescent women”) or that simply are not important (i.e. “why I like ice cream”). These topics may lead to a thesis that is either dry fact or a weird claim that cannot be supported. A good thesis falls somewhere between the two extremes. To arrive at this point, ask yourself what is new, interesting, contestable, or controversial about your topic.

As you work on your thesis, remember to keep the rest of your paper in mind at all times . Sometimes your thesis needs to evolve as you develop new insights, find new evidence, or take a different approach to your topic.

Derive a main point from topic

Once you have a topic, you will have to decide what the main point of your paper will be. This point, the “controlling idea,” becomes the core of your argument (thesis statement) and it is the unifying idea to which you will relate all your sub-theses. You can then turn this “controlling idea” into a purpose statement about what you intend to do in your paper.

Look for patterns in your evidence

Compose a purpose statement.

Consult the examples below for suggestions on how to look for patterns in your evidence and construct a purpose statement.

• Franco first tried to negotiate with the Axis
• Franco turned to the Allies when he couldn’t get some concessions that he wanted from the Axis

Possible conclusion:

Spain’s neutrality in WWII occurred for an entirely personal reason: Franco’s desire to preserve his own (and Spain’s) power.

Purpose statement

This paper will analyze Franco’s diplomacy during World War II to see how it contributed to Spain’s neutrality.

• The simile compares Simoisius to a tree, which is a peaceful, natural image.
• The tree in the simile is chopped down to make wheels for a chariot, which is an object used in warfare.

At first, the simile seems to take the reader away from the world of warfare, but we end up back in that world by the end.

This paper will analyze the way the simile about Simoisius at 4.547-64 moves in and out of the world of warfare.

Derive purpose statement from topic

To find out what your “controlling idea” is, you have to examine and evaluate your evidence . As you consider your evidence, you may notice patterns emerging, data repeated in more than one source, or facts that favor one view more than another. These patterns or data may then lead you to some conclusions about your topic and suggest that you can successfully argue for one idea better than another.

For instance, you might find out that Franco first tried to negotiate with the Axis, but when he couldn’t get some concessions that he wanted from them, he turned to the Allies. As you read more about Franco’s decisions, you may conclude that Spain’s neutrality in WWII occurred for an entirely personal reason: his desire to preserve his own (and Spain’s) power. Based on this conclusion, you can then write a trial thesis statement to help you decide what material belongs in your paper.

Sometimes you won’t be able to find a focus or identify your “spin” or specific argument immediately. Like some writers, you might begin with a purpose statement just to get yourself going. A purpose statement is one or more sentences that announce your topic and indicate the structure of the paper but do not state the conclusions you have drawn . Thus, you might begin with something like this:

• This paper will look at modern language to see if it reflects male dominance or female oppression.
• I plan to analyze anger and derision in offensive language to see if they represent a challenge of society’s authority.

At some point, you can turn a purpose statement into a thesis statement. As you think and write about your topic, you can restrict, clarify, and refine your argument, crafting your thesis statement to reflect your thinking.

As you work on your thesis, remember to keep the rest of your paper in mind at all times. Sometimes your thesis needs to evolve as you develop new insights, find new evidence, or take a different approach to your topic.

Compose a draft thesis statement

If you are writing a paper that will have an argumentative thesis and are having trouble getting started, the techniques in the table below may help you develop a temporary or “working” thesis statement.

Begin with a purpose statement that you will later turn into a thesis statement.

Assignment: Discuss the history of the Reform Party and explain its influence on the 1990 presidential and Congressional election.

Purpose Statement: This paper briefly sketches the history of the grassroots, conservative, Perot-led Reform Party and analyzes how it influenced the economic and social ideologies of the two mainstream parties.

Question-to-Assertion

If your assignment asks a specific question(s), turn the question(s) into an assertion and give reasons why it is true or reasons for your opinion.

Assignment : What do Aylmer and Rappaccini have to be proud of? Why aren’t they satisfied with these things? How does pride, as demonstrated in “The Birthmark” and “Rappaccini’s Daughter,” lead to unexpected problems?

Beginning thesis statement: Alymer and Rappaccinni are proud of their great knowledge; however, they are also very greedy and are driven to use their knowledge to alter some aspect of nature as a test of their ability. Evil results when they try to “play God.”

Write a sentence that summarizes the main idea of the essay you plan to write.

Main idea: The reason some toys succeed in the market is that they appeal to the consumers’ sense of the ridiculous and their basic desire to laugh at themselves.

Make a list of the ideas that you want to include; consider the ideas and try to group them.

• nature = peaceful
• war matériel = violent (competes with 1?)
• need for time and space to mourn the dead
• war is inescapable (competes with 3?)

Use a formula to arrive at a working thesis statement (you will revise this later).

• although most readers of _______ have argued that _______, closer examination shows that _______.
• _______ uses _______ and _____ to prove that ________.
• phenomenon x is a result of the combination of __________, __________, and _________.

What to keep in mind as you draft an initial thesis statement

Beginning statements obtained through the methods illustrated above can serve as a framework for planning or drafting your paper, but remember they’re not yet the specific, argumentative thesis you want for the final version of your paper. In fact, in its first stages, a thesis statement usually is ill-formed or rough and serves only as a planning tool.

As you write, you may discover evidence that does not fit your temporary or “working” thesis. Or you may reach deeper insights about your topic as you do more research, and you will find that your thesis statement has to be more complicated to match the evidence that you want to use.

You must be willing to reject or omit some evidence in order to keep your paper cohesive and your reader focused. Or you may have to revise your thesis to match the evidence and insights that you want to discuss. Read your draft carefully, noting the conclusions you have drawn and the major ideas which support or prove those conclusions. These will be the elements of your final thesis statement.

Sometimes you will not be able to identify these elements in your early drafts, but as you consider how your argument is developing and how your evidence supports your main idea, ask yourself, “ What is the main point that I want to prove/discuss? ” and “ How will I convince the reader that this is true? ” When you can answer these questions, then you can begin to refine the thesis statement.

Refine and polish the thesis statement

To get to your final thesis, you’ll need to refine your draft thesis so that it’s specific and arguable.

• Ask if your draft thesis addresses the assignment
• Question each part of your draft thesis
• Clarify vague phrases and assertions
• Investigate alternatives to your draft thesis

Consult the example below for suggestions on how to refine your draft thesis statement.

Sample Assignment

Choose an activity and define it as a symbol of American culture. Your essay should cause the reader to think critically about the society which produces and enjoys that activity.

• Ask The phenomenon of drive-in facilities is an interesting symbol of american culture, and these facilities demonstrate significant characteristics of our society.This statement does not fulfill the assignment because it does not require the reader to think critically about society.

Drive-ins are an interesting symbol of American culture because they represent Americans’ significant creativity and business ingenuity.

Among the types of drive-in facilities familiar during the twentieth century, drive-in movie theaters best represent American creativity, not merely because they were the forerunner of later drive-ins and drive-throughs, but because of their impact on our culture: they changed our relationship to the automobile, changed the way people experienced movies, and changed movie-going into a family activity.

While drive-in facilities such as those at fast-food establishments, banks, pharmacies, and dry cleaners symbolize America’s economic ingenuity, they also have affected our personal standards.

While drive-in facilities such as those at fast- food restaurants, banks, pharmacies, and dry cleaners symbolize (1) Americans’ business ingenuity, they also have contributed (2) to an increasing homogenization of our culture, (3) a willingness to depersonalize relationships with others, and (4) a tendency to sacrifice quality for convenience.

This statement is now specific and fulfills all parts of the assignment. This version, like any good thesis, is not self-evident; its points, 1-4, will have to be proven with evidence in the body of the paper. The numbers in this statement indicate the order in which the points will be presented. Depending on the length of the paper, there could be one paragraph for each numbered item or there could be blocks of paragraph for even pages for each one.

Complete the final thesis statement

The bottom line.

As you move through the process of crafting a thesis, you’ll need to remember four things:

• Context matters! Think about your course materials and lectures. Try to relate your thesis to the ideas your instructor is discussing.
• As you go through the process described in this section, always keep your assignment in mind . You will be more successful when your thesis (and paper) responds to the assignment than if it argues a semi-related idea.
• Your thesis statement should be precise, focused, and contestable ; it should predict the sub-theses or blocks of information that you will use to prove your argument.
• Make sure that you keep the rest of your paper in mind at all times. Change your thesis as your paper evolves, because you do not want your thesis to promise more than your paper actually delivers.

In the beginning, the thesis statement was a tool to help you sharpen your focus, limit material and establish the paper’s purpose. When your paper is finished, however, the thesis statement becomes a tool for your reader. It tells the reader what you have learned about your topic and what evidence led you to your conclusion. It keeps the reader on track–well able to understand and appreciate your argument.

Writing Process and Structure

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Getting Started with Your Paper

Interpreting Writing Assignments from Your Courses

Generating Ideas for

Creating an Argument

Thesis vs. Purpose Statements

Architecture of Arguments

Working with Sources

Quoting and Paraphrasing Sources

Using Literary Quotations

Citing Sources in Your Paper

Drafting Your Paper

Generating Ideas for Your Paper

Introductions

Paragraphing

Developing Strategic Transitions

Conclusions

Revising Your Paper

Peer Reviews

Reverse Outlines

Revising an Argumentative Paper

Revision Strategies for Longer Projects

Finishing Your Paper

Twelve Common Errors: An Editing Checklist

How to Proofread your Paper

Writing Collaboratively

Collaborative and Group Writing

• Walden University

How do I write a premise?

• Student-Facing Quick Answers
• Walden College of Nursing | Continuing Education
• zPop Up Widgets
• 119 Academic Residencies
• 267 Academic Skills Center
• 16 Accommodations
• 5 APA: in-text citations
• 3 APA: references
• 5 APA: Word formatting
• 12 Appointments
• 106 Archive
• 7 Capstone Intensive
• 9 Career Management
• 27 Career Planning & Development
• 13 Career Services Center
• 5 Center for Global, Professional, and Applied Learning
• 3 Commencement & Graduation
• 18 Course Materials
• 63 Course-Level Statistics
• 123 Customer Care Team
• 15 Disability Services
• 48 Dissertation
• 61 Doctoral Capstone
• 12 Doctoral Degree Coach
• 29 Doctoral Peer Mentors
• 48 Doctoral Study
• 28 Doctoral Writing Assessment
• 19 Doctoral Writing Workshops
• 7 ePortfolio
• 39 Field Experience
• 35 Financial Aid
• 18 Financial Services
• 18 Full Text
• 18 Google Scholar
• 2 Grammarly
• 8 Institutional Review Board (IRB)
• 31 International
• 1 International Student Finance Portal
• 15 Job Search
• 211 Library
• 39 Library Databases
• 34 Library Research
• 161 Library Skills
• 72 Literature Review
• 36 Mechanics/Punctuation
• 12 Methodology
• 29 Military Services
• 2 Military Spouses & Dependants
• 11 MS PowerPoint
• 10 MyWalden
• 7 Networking
• 12 New Students
• 5 Office 365
• 11 Office of Degree Acceleration
• 40 Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• 69 Policies
• 15 Practicum
• 32 Project Study
• 7 Reading Skills
• 19 Registration
• 12 School-Life Balance
• 29 Skills Courses
• 89 Software/Technology
• 4 Statistical Tests: Multivariate Methods
• 17 Statistical Tests: Probability and Regression
• 15 Statistical Tests: Tests of Mean Differences
• 48 Statistical Tools
• 61 Statistics
• 4 Student Organizations
• 4 Student Records
• 46 Student Success Advising
• 1 Student Wellness & Disability Services
• 6 Study Abroad
• 17 Study Skills
• 7 Taskstream
• 21 Textbooks & Course Materials
• 4 Transcripts
• 15 Tutoring
• 28 Veterans
• 20 Virtual Residency
• 363 Writing Center
• 3 Writing: Academic Writing

Answered By: Paul Lai Last Updated: Jul 17, 2023     Views: 12545

For students pursuing a PhD, the premise is the document that conveys their initial investigation into a research topic—completing the premise comes at the beginning of the capstone process. Your premise will be used to (a) identify your preliminary topic and (b) help identify the faculty members who will help guide your development of the dissertation prospectus.Take a look at the Writing Center's pre-proposal kit for resources to begin your writing process. Once you start, feel free to make an appointment with a writing instructor for a one-to-one review of your premise document. 

Then download and read over the Dissertation Premise Guide available in the PhD section of the Office of Student Research Administration . This document has guidelines for how to construct a premise. You can also download  the Premise Template available through the Writing Center  to make sure that your document follows the correct formatting specifications.

Additionally, the Academic Skills Center offers 6-week doctoral writing workshops for students working on their preproposal (premise and prospectus) documents all the way through the final capstone chapters.  Find more  information regarding the doctoral writing workshops  on the Academic Skills Center's website. 

Additional Resources:

Where can I find resources to help me write my Capstone (dissertation, doctoral study, project study, DNP study)?

Further Questions?

Would you like a current or future assignment to be reviewed by the Writing Center?  If so please visit  the Writing Center's Paper Review Website  and make an appointment with us! 

Do you have other general writing questions?  Ask OASIS ! 

Other questions about your doctoral capstone or the Form & Style review? E-mail the Dissertation Editors at  [email protected] .

Want to peruse other writing resources?  Go to the Writing Center’s homepage . 

• Share on Facebook

Help us do better. Was this helpful?

Related Topics

• Doctoral Capstone
• Writing Center
• Dissertation
• Doctoral Study
• Project Study

More Information

Need more information? Ask us !

Or browse Quick Answers by Topic .

• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Student Affairs
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Cost of Attendance
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

While Sandel argues that pursuing perfection through genetic engineering would decrease our sense of humility, he claims that the sense of solidarity we would lose is also important.

This thesis summarizes several points in Sandel’s argument, but it does not make a claim about how we should understand his argument. A reader who read Sandel’s argument would not also need to read an essay based on this descriptive thesis.  

Broad thesis (arguable, but difficult to support with evidence) 

Michael Sandel’s arguments about genetic engineering do not take into consideration all the relevant issues.

This is an arguable claim because it would be possible to argue against it by saying that Michael Sandel’s arguments do take all of the relevant issues into consideration. But the claim is too broad. Because the thesis does not specify which “issues” it is focused on—or why it matters if they are considered—readers won’t know what the rest of the essay will argue, and the writer won’t know what to focus on. If there is a particular issue that Sandel does not address, then a more specific version of the thesis would include that issue—hand an explanation of why it is important.  

Arguable thesis with analytical claim 

While Sandel argues persuasively that our instinct to “remake” (54) ourselves into something ever more perfect is a problem, his belief that we can always draw a line between what is medically necessary and what makes us simply “better than well” (51) is less convincing.

This is an arguable analytical claim. To argue for this claim, the essay writer will need to show how evidence from the article itself points to this interpretation. It’s also a reasonable scope for a thesis because it can be supported with evidence available in the text and is neither too broad nor too narrow.  

Arguable thesis with normative claim 

Given Sandel’s argument against genetic enhancement, we should not allow parents to decide on using Human Growth Hormone for their children.

This thesis tells us what we should do about a particular issue discussed in Sandel’s article, but it does not tell us how we should understand Sandel’s argument.  

Questions to ask about your thesis 

• Is the thesis truly arguable? Does it speak to a genuine dilemma in the source, or would most readers automatically agree with it?  
• Is the thesis too obvious? Again, would most or all readers agree with it without needing to see your argument?  
• Is the thesis complex enough to require a whole essay's worth of argument?  
• Is the thesis supportable with evidence from the text rather than with generalizations or outside research?  
• Would anyone want to read a paper in which this thesis was developed? That is, can you explain what this paper is adding to our understanding of a problem, question, or topic?
• picture_as_pdf Thesis

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Kirsten DeVries

At school, at work, and in everyday life, argument is one of main ways we exchange ideas with one another.  Academics, business people, scientists, and other professionals all make arguments to determine what to do or think, or to solve a problem by enlisting others to do or believe something they otherwise would not.  Not surprisingly, then, argument dominates writing, and training in argument writing is essential for all college students.

This chapter will explore how to define argument and how to talk about arguments.

1.       What Is Argument?

2.       What Are the Components and Vocabulary of Argument?

1.   What Is Argument?

All people, including you, make arguments on a regular basis.  When you make a claim and then support the claim with reasons, you are making an argument. Consider the following:

• If, as a teenager, you ever made a case for borrowing your parents’ car using reasonable support—a track record of responsibility in other areas of your life, a good rating from your driving instructor, and promises to follow rules of driving conduct laid out by your parents—you have made an argument.
• If, as an employee, you ever persuaded your boss to give you a raise using concrete evidence—records of sales increases in your sector, a work calendar with no missed days, and personal testimonials from satisfied customers—you have made an argument.
• If, as a gardener, you ever shared your crops at a farmer’s market, declaring that your produce is better than others using relevant support—because you used the most appropriate soil, water level, and growing time for each crop—you’ve made an argument.
• If, as a literature student, you ever wrote an essay on your interpretation of a poem—defending your ideas with examples from the text and logical explanations for how those examples demonstrate your interpretation—you have made an argument.

The two main models of argument desired in college courses as part of the training for academic or professional life are rhetorical argument and academic argument .  If rhetoric is the study of the craft of writing and speaking, particularly writing or speaking designed to convince and persuade, the student studying rhetorical argument focuses on how to create an argument that convinces and persuades effectively.  To that end, the student must understand how to think broadly about argument, the particular vocabulary of argument, and the logic of argument.  The close sibling of rhetorical argument is academic argument, argument used to discuss and evaluate ideas, usually within a professional field of study, and to convince others of those ideas. In academic argument , interpretation and research play the central roles.

However, it would be incorrect to say that academic argument and rhetorical argument do not overlap.  Indeed, they do, and often.  A psychologist not only wishes to prove an important idea with research, but she will also wish to do so in the most effective way possible.  A politician will want to make the most persuasive case for his side, but he should also be mindful of data that may support his points.   Thus, throughout this chapter, when you see the term argument , it refers to a broad category including both rhetorical and academic argument .

Before moving to the specific parts and vocabulary of argument, it will be helpful to consider some further ideas about what argument is and what it is not.

Argument vs. Controversy or Fight

Consumers of written texts are often tempted to divide writing into two categories: argumentative and non-argumentative. According to this view, to be argumentative, writing must have the following qualities: It has to defend a position in a debate between two or more opposing sides, it must be on a controversial topic, and the goal of such writing must be to prove the correctness of one point of view over another.

A related definition of argument implies a confrontation, a clash of opinions and personalities, or just a plain verbal fight. It implies a winner and a loser, a right side and a wrong one. Because of this understanding of the word “argument,” many students think the only type of argument writing is the debate-like position paper, in which the author defends his or her point of view against other, usually opposing, points of view.

These two characteristics of argument—as controversial and as a fight—limit the definition because arguments come in different disguises, from hidden to subtle to commanding. It is useful to look at the term “argument” in a new way. What if we think of argument as an opportunity for conversation, for sharing with others our point of view on an issue, for showing others our perspective of the world? What if we think of argument as an opportunity to connect with the points of view of others rather than defeating those points of view?

One community that values argument as a type of communication and exchange is the community of scholars.  They advance their arguments to share research and new ways of thinking about topics.  Biologists, for example, do not gather data and write up analyses of the results because they wish to fight with other biologists, even if they disagree with the ideas of other biologists.  They wish to share their discoveries and get feedback on their ideas.  When historians put forth an argument, they do so often while building on the arguments of other historians who came before them.  Literature scholars publish their interpretations of different works of literature to enhance understanding and share new views, not necessarily to have one interpretation replace all others.  There may be debates within any field of study, but those debates can be healthy and constructive if they mean even more scholars come together to explore the ideas involved in those debates.  Thus, be prepared for your college professors to have a much broader view of argument than a mere fight over a controversial topic or two.

Argument vs. Opinion

Argument is often confused with opinion.  Indeed, arguments and opinions sound alike.  Someone with an opinion asserts a claim that he thinks is true.  Someone with an argument asserts a claim that she thinks is true.  Although arguments and opinions do sound the same, there are two important differences:

• Arguments have rules; opinions do not .  In other words, to form an argument, you must consider whether the argument is reasonable.  Is it worth making?  Is it valid?  Is it sound?  Do all of its parts fit together logically?  Opinions, on the other hand, have no rules, and anyone asserting an opinion need not think it through for it to count as one; however, it will not count as an argument.
• Arguments have support; opinions do not .  If you make a claim and then stop, as if the claim itself were enough to demonstrate its truthfulness, you have asserted an opinion only.  An argument must be supported, and the support of an argument has its own rules.  The support must also be reasonable, relevant, and sufficient.

Figure 3.1 “Opinion vs Argument”

Argument vs. Thesis

Another point of confusion is the difference between an argument and an essay’s thesis .  For college essays, there is no essential difference between an argument and a thesis; most professors use these terms interchangeably.  An argument is a claim that you must then support.  The main claim of an essay is the point of the essay and provides the purpose for the essay.  Thus, the main claim of an essay is also the thesis. For more on the thesis, see Chapter 4, “ The Writing Process.”

Consider this as well: Most formal essays center upon one main claim (the thesis) but then support that main claim with supporting evidence and arguments.  The topic sentence of a body paragraph can be another type of argument, though a supporting one, and, hence, a narrower one.  Try not to be confused when professors call both the thesis and topic sentences arguments.  They are not wrong because arguments come in different forms; some claims are broad enough to be broken down into a number of supporting arguments.  Many longer essays are structured by the smaller arguments that are a part of and support the main argument.  Sometimes professors, when they say supporting points or supporting arguments, mean the reasons ( premises ) for the main claim ( conclusion ) you make in an essay.  If a claim has a number of reasons, those reasons will form the support structure for the essay, and each reason will be the basis for the topic sentence of its body paragraph.

Argument vs. Fact

Arguments are also commonly mistaken for statements of fact.  This comes about because often people privilege facts over opinions, even as they defend the right to have opinions.  In other words, facts are “good,” and opinions are “bad,” or if not exactly bad, then fuzzy and thus easy to reject.  However, remember the important distinction between an argument and an opinion stated above: While argument may sound like an opinion, the two are not the same.  An opinion is an assertion, but it is left to stand alone with little to no reasoning or support. An argument is much stronger because it includes and demonstrates reasons and support for its claim.

As for mistaking a fact for an argument, keep this important distinction in mind: An argument must be arguable .  In everyday life, arguable is often a synonym for doubtful.  For an argument, though, arguable means that it is worth arguing, that it has a range of possible answers, angles, or perspectives: It is an answer, angle, or perspective with which a reasonable person might disagree.  Facts, by virtue of being facts, are not arguable.   Facts are statements that can be definitely proven using objective data. The statement that is a fact is absolutely valid. In other words, the statement can be pronounced as definitively true or definitively false. For example, 2 + 2 = 4. This expression identifies a verifiably true statement, or a fact, because it can be proved with objective data.  When a fact is established, there is no other side, and there should be no disagreement.

The misunderstanding about facts (being inherently good) and argument (being inherently problematic because it is not a fact) leads to the mistaken belief that facts have no place in an argument.  This could not be farther from the truth.  First of all, most arguments are formed by analyzing facts.  Second, facts provide one type of support for an argument.  Thus, do not think of facts and arguments as enemies; rather, they work closely together.

Explicit vs. Implicit Arguments

Arguments can be both explicit and implicit. Explicit arguments contain prominent and definable thesis statements and multiple specific proofs to support them. This is common in academic writing from scholars of all fields.   Implicit arguments , on the other hand, work by weaving together facts and narratives, logic and emotion, personal experiences and statistics. Unlike explicit arguments, implicit ones do not have a one-sentence thesis statement. Implicit arguments involve evidence of many different kinds to build and convey their point of view to their audience. Both types use rhetoric, logic, and support to create effective arguments.

Argument and Rhetoric

An argument in written form involves making choices, and knowing the principles of rhetoric allows a writer to make informed choices about various aspects of the writing process. Every act of writing takes place in a specific rhetorical situation. The most basic and important components of a rhetorical situation are

• Author of the text.
• Purpose of the text.
• Intended audience (i.e., those the author imagines will be reading the text).
• Form or type of text.

These components give readers a way to analyze a text on first encounter.  These factors also help writers select their topics, arrange their material, and make other important decisions about the argument they will make and the support they will need.  For more on rhetoric, see Chapter 2, “Rhetorical Analysis.”

Key Takeaways: What is an Argument?

With this brief introduction, you can see what rhetorical or academic argument is not :

• An argument need not be controversial or about a controversy.
• An argument is not a mere fight.
• An argument does not have a single winner or loser.
• An argument is not a mere opinion.
• An argument is not a statement of fact.

Furthermore, you can see what rhetorical argument is :

• An argument is a claim asserted as true.
• An argument is arguable.
• An argument must be reasonable.
• An argument must be supported.
• An argument in a formal essay is called a thesis.  Supporting arguments can be called topic sentences.
• An argument can be explicit or implicit.
• An argument must be adapted to its rhetorical situation.

2. What Are the Components and Vocabulary of Argument?

Questions are at the core of arguments. What matters is not just that you believe that what you have to say is true, but that you give others viable reasons to believe it as well—and also show them that you have considered the issue from multiple angles. To do that, build your argument out of the answers to the five questions a rational reader will expect answers to.  In academic and professional writing, we tend to build arguments from the answers to these main questions:

• What do you want me to do or think?
• Why should I do or think that?
• How do I know that what you say is true?
• Why should I accept the reasons that support your claim?
• What about this other idea, fact, or consideration?
• How should you present your argument?

When you ask people to do or think something they otherwise would not, they quite naturally want to know why they should do so. In fact, people tend to ask the same questions. As you make a reasonable argument, you anticipate and respond to readers’ questions with a particular part of argument:

1. The answer to What do you want me to do or think? is your conclusion : “I conclude that you should do or think X.”

2. The answer to Why should I do or think that? states your premise : “You should do or think X because . . .”

3. The answer to How do I know that what you say is true? presents your support : “You can believe my reasons because they are supported by these facts . . .”

4. The answer to Why should I accept that your reasons support your claim? states your general principle of reasoning, called a warrant : “My specific reason supports my specific claim because whenever this general condition is true, we can generally draw a conclusion like mine.”

5. The answer to What about this other idea, fact, or conclusion? acknowledges that your readers might see things differently and then responds to their counterarguments .

6. The answer to How should you present your argument? leads to the point of view , organization , and tone that you should use when making your arguments.

As you have noticed, the answers to these questions involve knowing the particular vocabulary about argument because these terms refer to specific parts of an argument.  The remainder of this section will cover the terms referred to in the questions listed above as well as others that will help you better understand the building blocks of argument.

What Is a Conclusion, and What Is a Premise?

The root notion of an argument is that it convinces us that something is true. What we are being convinced of is the conclusion . An example would be this claim:

Littering is harmful.

A reason for this conclusion is called the premise . Typically, a conclusion will be supported by two or more premises . Both premises and conclusions are statements .  Some premises for our littering conclusion might be these:

       Littering is dangerous to animals.

       Littering is dangerous to humans.

Thus, to be clear, understand that an argument asserts that the writer’s claim is true in two main parts: the premises of the argument exist to show that the conclusion is true.

Be aware of the other words to indicate a conclusion– claim , assertion , point –and other ways to talk about the premise– reason , factor , the why .  Also, do not confuse this use of the word conclusion with a conclusion paragraph for an essay.

What Is a Statement?

A statement is a type of sentence that can be true or false and corresponds to the grammatical category of a declarative sentence . For example, the sentence,

The Nile is a river in northeastern Africa,

is a statement because it makes sense to inquire whether it is true or false. (In this case, it happens to be true.) However, a sentence is still a statement, even if it is false. For example, the sentence,

The Yangtze is a river in Japan,

is still a statement; it is just a false statement (the Yangtze River is in China). In contrast, none of the following sentences are statements:

Please help yourself to more casserole.

Don’t tell your mother about the surprise.

Do you like Vietnamese pho?

None of these sentences are statements because it does not make sense to ask whether those sentences are true or false; rather, they are a request, a command, and a question, respectively.  Make sure to remember the difference between sentences that are declarative statements and sentences that are not because arguments depend on declarative statements .

A question cannot be an argument, yet students will often pose a question at the end of an introduction to an essay, thinking they have declared their thesis.  They have not.  If, however, they answer that question ( conclusion ) and give some reasons for that answer ( premises ), they then have the components necessary for both an argument and a declarative statement of that argument ( thesis ).

To reiterate: All arguments are composed of premises and conclusions, both of which are types of statements. The premises of the argument provide reasons for thinking that the conclusion is true. Arguments typically involve more than one premise.

What Is Standard Argument Form?

A standard way of capturing the structure of an argument, or diagramming it, is by numbering the premises and conclusion.  For example, the following represents another way to arrange the littering argument:

• Littering is harmful
• Litter is dangerous to animals
• Litter is dangerous to humans

This numbered list represents an argument that has been put into standard argument form .  A more precise definition of an argument now emerges, employing the vocabulary that is specific to academic and rhetorical arguments. An argument is a set of statements , some of which (the premises : statements 2 and 3 above) attempt to provide a reason for thinking that some other statement (the conclusion : statement 1) is true.

Diagramming an argument can be helpful when trying to figure out your essay’s thesis.  Because a thesis is an argument, putting the parts of an argument into standard form can help sort ideas.  You can transform the numbered ideas into a cohesive sentence or two for your thesis once you are more certain what your argument parts are.

Figure 3.2 “Argument Diagram”

Recognizing arguments is essential to analysis and critical thinking; if you cannot distinguish between the details (the support) of a piece of writing and what those details are there to support (the argument), you will likely misunderstand what you are reading.  Additionally, studying how others make arguments can help you learn how to effectively create your own.

What Are Argument Indicators?

While mapping an argument in standard argument form can be a good way to figure out and formulate a thesis, identifying arguments by other writers is also important.  The best way to identify an argument is to ask whether a claim exists (in statement form) that a writer justifies by reasons (also in statement form). Other identifying markers of arguments are key words or phrases that are premise indicators or conclusion indicators. For example, recall the littering argument, reworded here into a single sentence (much like a thesis statement):

Littering is harmful because it is dangerous to both animals and humans.

The word “because” here is a premise indicator . That is, “because” indicates that what follows is a reason for thinking that littering is bad. Here is another example:

The student plagiarized since I found the exact same sentences on a website, and the website was published more than a year before the student wrote the paper.

In this example, the word “since” is a premise indicator because what follows is a statement that is clearly intended to be a reason for thinking that the student plagiarized (i.e., a premise). Notice that in these two cases, the premise indicators “because” and “since” are interchangeable: “because” could be used in place of “since” or “since” in the place of “because,” and the meaning of the sentences would have been the same.

Figure 3.3 “Common Premise Indicators”

In addition to premise indicators, there are also conclusion indicators . Conclusion indicators mark that what follows is the conclusion of an argument. For example,

Bob-the-arsonist has been dead for a year, so Bob-the-arsonist didn’t set the fire at the East Lansing Starbucks last week.

In this example, the word “so” is a conclusion indicator because what follows it is a statement that someone is trying to establish as true (i.e., a conclusion). Here is another example of a conclusion indicator:

A poll administered by Gallup (a respected polling company) showed candidate X to be substantially behind candidate Y with only a week left before the vote; therefore , candidate Y will probably not win the election.

In this example, the word “therefore” is a conclusion indicator because what follows it is a statement that someone is trying to establish as true (i.e., a conclusion). As before, in both of these cases, the conclusion indicators “so” and “therefore” are interchangeable: “So” could be used in place of “therefore” or “therefore” in the place of “so,” and the meaning of the sentences would have been the same.

Figure 3.4 “Common Conclusion Indicators”

Which of the following are arguments?  If it is an argument, identify the conclusion (claim) of the argument. If it is not an argument, explain why not.  Remember to look for the qualifying features of an argument: (1) It is a statement or series of statements, (2) it states a claim (a conclusion), and (3) it has at least one premise (reason for the claim).

• The woman with the hat is not a witch since witches have long noses, and she doesn’t have a long nose.
• I have been wrangling cattle since before you were old enough to tie your own shoes.
• Albert is angry with me, so he probably won’t be willing to help me wash the dishes.
• First, I washed the dishes, and then I dried them.
• If the road weren’t icy, the car wouldn’t have slid off the turn.
• Marvin isn’t a fireman and isn’t a fisherman, either.
• Are you seeing the rhinoceros over there? It’s huge!
• Obesity has become a problem in the US because obesity rates have risen over the past four decades.
• Bob showed me a graph with rising obesity rates, and I was very surprised to see how much they had risen.
• Marvin isn’t a fireman because Marvin is a Greyhound, which is a type of dog, and dogs can’t be firemen.
• What Susie told you is not the actual reason she missed her flight to Denver.
• Carol likely forgot to lock her door this morning because she was distracted by a clown riding a unicycle while singing Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Simple Man.”
• No one who has ever gotten frostbite while climbing K2 has survived to tell about it; therefore, no one ever will.

What Constitutes Support?

To ensure that your argument is sound—that the premises for your conclusion are true—you must establish support .  The burden of proof, to borrow language from law, is on the one making an argument, not on the recipient of an argument.  If you wish to assert a claim, you must then also support it, and this support must be relevant, logical, and sufficient.

It is important to use the right kind of evidence, to use it effectively, and to have an appropriate amount of it.

• If, for example, your philosophy professor did not like that you used a survey of public opinion as your primary evidence in an ethics paper, you most likely used material that was not relevant to your topic.  Rather, you should find out what philosophers count as good evidence. Different fields of study involve types of evidence based on relevance to those fields.
• If your professor has put question marks by your thesis or has written, “It does not follow,” you likely have problems with logic .  Make sure it is clear how the parts of your argument logically fit together.
• If your instructor has told you that you need more analysis, suggested that you are “just listing” points or giving a “laundry list,” you likely have not included enough explanation for how a point connects to and supports your argument, which is another problem with logic , this time related to the warrants of your argument. You need to fully incorporate evidence into your argument. (See more on warrants immediately below.)
• If you see comments like “for example?,” “proof?,” “go deeper,” or “expand,” you may need more evidence.  In other words, the evidence you have is not yet sufficient .  One or two pieces of evidence will not be enough to prove your argument.  Similarly, multiple pieces of evidence that aren’t developed thoroughly would also be flawed, also insufficient. Would a lawyer go to trial with only one piece of evidence?  No, the lawyer would want to have as much evidence as possible from a variety of sources to make a viable case.  Similarly, a lawyer would fully develop evidence for a claim using explanation, facts, statistics, stories, experiences, research, details, and the like.

You will find more information about the different types of evidence, how to find them, and what makes them credible in Chapter 6, “Research.”   Logic will be covered later on in this chapter.

What Is the Warrant?

Above all, connect the evidence to the argument.  This connection is the warrant .  Evidence is not self-evident.  In other words, after introducing evidence into your writing, you must demonstrate why and how this evidence supports your argument. You must explain the significance of the evidence and its function in your paper. What turns a fact or piece of information into evidence is the connection it has with a larger claim or argument: Evidence is always evidence for or against something, and you have to make that link clear.

Student writers sometimes assume that readers already know the information being written about; students may be wary of elaborating too much because they think their points are obvious. But remember, readers are not mind readers: Although they may be familiar with many of the ideas discussed, they don’t know what writers want to do with those ideas unless they indicate that through explanations, organization, and transitions. Thus, when you write, be sure to explain the connections you made in your mind when you chose your evidence, decided where to place it in your paper, and drew conclusions based on it.

What Is a Counterargument?

Remember that arguments are multi-sided. As you brainstorm and prepare to present your idea and your support for it, consider other sides of the issue. These other sides are counterarguments . Make a list of counterarguments as you work through the writing process, and use them to build your case – to widen your idea to include a valid counterargument, to explain how a counterargument might be defeated, to illustrate how a counterargument may not withstand the scrutiny your research has uncovered, and/or to show that you are aware of and have taken into account other possibilities.

For example, you might choose the issue of declawing cats and set up your search with the question should I have my indoor cat declawed? Your research, interviews, surveys, personal experiences might yield several angles on this question: Yes, it will save your furniture and your arms and ankles. No, it causes psychological issues for the cat. No, if the cat should get outside, he will be without defense. As a writer, be prepared to address alternate arguments and to include them to the extent that it will illustrate your reasoning.

Almost anything claimed in a paper can be refuted or challenged. Opposing points of view and arguments exist in every debate. It is smart to anticipate possible objections to your arguments – and to do so will make your arguments stronger. Another term for a counterargument is antithesis (i.e., the opposition to a thesis). To find possible counterarguments (and keep in mind there can be many counterpoints to one claim), ask the following questions:

• Could someone draw a different conclusion from the facts or examples you present?
• Could a reader question any of your assumptions or claims?
• Could a reader offer a different explanation of an issue?
• Is there any evidence out there that could weaken your position?

If the answer to any of these questions is yes, the next set of questions can help you respond to these potential objections:

Is it possible to concede the point of the opposition, but then challenge that point’s importance/usefulness?

• Can you offer an explanation of why a reader should question a piece of evidence or consider a different point of view?
• Can you explain how your position responds to any contradicting evidence?
• Can you put forward a different interpretation of evidence?

It may not seem likely at first, but clearly recognizing and addressing different sides of the argument, the ones that are not your own, can make your argument and paper stronger. By addressing the antithesis of your argument essay, you are showing your readers that you have carefully considered the issue and accept that there are often other ways to view the same thing.

You can use signal phrases in your paper to alert readers that you are about to present an objection. Consider using one of these phrases–or ones like them–at the beginning of a paragraph:

• Researchers have challenged these claims with…
• Critics argue that this view…
• Some readers may point to…

What Are More Complex Argument Structures?

So far you have seen that an argument consists of a conclusion and a premise (typically more than one). However, often arguments and explanations have a more complex structure than just a few premises that directly support the conclusion. For example, consider the following argument:

No one living in Pompeii could have survived the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. The reason is simple: The lava was flowing too fast, and there was nowhere to go to escape it in time. Therefore, this account of the eruption, which claims to have been written by an eyewitness living in Pompeii, was not actually written by an eyewitness.

The main conclusion of this argument—the statement that depends on other statements as evidence but doesn’t itself provide any evidence for other statements—is

A. This account of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius was not actually written by an eyewitness.

However, the argument’s structure is more complex than simply having a couple of premises that provide evidence directly for the conclusion. Rather, some statements provide evidence directly for the main conclusion, but some premise statements support other premise statements which then support the conclusion.

To determine the structure of an argument, you must determine which statements support which, using premise and conclusion indicators to help. For example, the passage above contains the phrase, “the reason is…” which is a premise indicator, and it also contains the conclusion indicator, “therefore.” That conclusion indicator helps identify the main conclusion, but the more important element to see is that statement A does not itself provide evidence or support for any of the other statements in the argument, which is the clearest reason statement A is the main conclusion of the argument. The next questions to answer are these: Which statement most directly supports A? What most directly supports A is

B. No one living in Pompeii could have survived the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius.

However, there is also a reason offered in support of B. That reason is the following:

C. The lava from Mt. Vesuvius was flowing too fast, and there was nowhere for someone living in Pompeii to go to escape it in time.

So the main conclusion (A) is directly supported by B, and B is supported by C.  Since B acts as a premise for the main conclusion but is also itself the conclusion of further premises, B is classified as an intermediate conclusion . What you should recognize here is that one and the same statement can act as both a premise and a conclusion . Statement B is a premise that supports the main conclusion (A), but it is also itself a conclusion that follows from C. Here is how to put this complex argument into standard form (using numbers this time, as is typical for diagramming arguments):

• The lava from Mt. Vesuvius was flowing too fast, and there was nowhere for someone living in Pompeii to go to escape it in time.
• Therefore, no one living in Pompeii could have survived the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. (from 1)
• Therefore, this account of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius was not actually written by an eyewitness. (from 2)

Notice that at the end of statement 2 is a written indicator in parentheses (from 1), and, likewise, at the end of statement 3 is another indicator (from 2). From 1 is a shorthand way of saying, “this statement follows logically from statement 1.” Use this convention as a way to keep track of an argument’s structure. It may also help to think about the structure of an argument spatially, as the figure below shows:

The main argument here (from 2 to 3) contains a subargument , in this case, the argument from 1 (a premise) to 2 (the intermediate conclusion). A subargument, as the term suggests, is a part of an argument that provides indirect support for the main argument. The main argument is simply the argument whose conclusion is the main conclusion.

Another type of structure that arguments can have is when two or more premises provide direct but independent support for the conclusion. Here is an example of an argument with that structure:

Wanda rode her bike to work today because when she arrived at work she had her right pant leg rolled up, which cyclists do to keep their pants legs from getting caught in the chain. Moreover, our co-worker, Bob, who works in accounting, saw her riding towards work at 7:45 a.m.

The conclusion of this argument is “Wanda rode her bike to work today”; two premises provide independent support for it: the fact that Wanda had her pant leg cuffed and the fact that Bob saw her riding her bike. Here is the argument in standard form:

• Wanda arrived at work with her right pant leg rolled up.
• Cyclists often roll up their right pant leg.
• Bob saw Wanda riding her bike towards work at 7:45.
• Therefore, Wanda rode her bike to work today. (from 1-2, 3 independently)

Again, notice that next to statement 4 of the argument is an indicator of how each part of the argument relates to the main conclusion. In this case, to avoid any ambiguity, you can see that the support for the conclusion comes independently from statements 1 and 2, on the one hand, and from statement 3, on the other hand. It is important to point out that an argument or subargumen t can be supported by one or more premises, the case in this argument because the main conclusion (4) is supported jointly by 1 and 2, and singly by 3. As before, we can represent the structure of this argument spatially, as the figure below shows:

There are endless argument structures that can be generated from a few simple patterns. At this point, it is important to understand that arguments can have different structures and that some arguments will be more complex than others. Determining the structure of complex arguments is a skill that takes some time to master, rather like simplifying equations in math. Even so, it may help to remember that any argument structure ultimately traces back to some combination of premises, intermediate arguments, and a main conclusion.

Write the following arguments in standard form.  If any arguments are complex, show how each complex argument is structured using a diagram like those shown just above.

1. There is nothing wrong with prostitution because there is nothing wrong with consensual sexual and economic interactions between adults. Moreover, there is no difference between a man who goes on a blind date with a woman, buys her dinner and then has sex with her and a man who simply pays a woman for sex, which is another reason there is nothing wrong with prostitution.

2. Prostitution is wrong because it involves women who have typically been sexually abused as children. Proof that these women have been abused comes from multiple surveys done with female prostitutes that show a high percentage of self-reported sexual abuse as children.

3. Someone was in this cabin recently because warm water was in the tea kettle and wood was still smoldering in the fireplace. However, the person couldn’t have been Tim because Tim has been with me the whole time. Therefore, someone else must be in these woods.

4. Someone can be blind and yet run in the Olympic Games since Marla Runyan did it at the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

5. The train was late because it had to take a longer, alternate route seeing as the bridge was out.

6. Israel is not safe if Iran gets nuclear missiles because Iran has threatened multiple times to destroy Israel, and if Iran had nuclear missiles, it would be able to carry out this threat. Furthermore, since Iran has been developing enriched uranium, it has the key component needed for nuclear weapons; every other part of the process of building a nuclear weapon is simple compared to that. Therefore, Israel is not safe.

7. Since all professional hockey players are missing front teeth, and Martin is a professional hockey player, it follows that Martin is missing front teeth. Because almost all professional athletes who are missing their front teeth have false teeth, it follows that Martin probably has false teeth.

8. Anyone who eats the crab rangoon at China Food restaurant will probably have stomach troubles afterward. It has happened to me every time; thus, it will probably happen to other people as well. Since Bob ate the crab rangoon at China Food restaurant, he will probably have stomach troubles afterward.

9. Lucky and Caroline like to go for runs in the afternoon in Hyde Park.  Because Lucky never runs alone, any time Albert is running, Caroline must also be running. Albert looks like he has just run (since he is panting hard), so it follows that Caroline must have run, too.

10. Just because Linda’s prints were on the gun that killed Terry and the gun was registered to Linda, it doesn’t mean that Linda killed Terry since Linda’s prints would certainly be on her own gun, and someone else could have stolen her gun and used it to kill Terry.

Key Takeaways: Components of Vocabulary and Argument

• Conclusion —a claim that is asserted as true.  One part of an argument.
• Premise —a reason behind a conclusion.  The other part of an argument.  Most conclusions have more than one premise.
• Statement —a declarative sentence that can be evaluated as true or false.  The parts of an argument, premises and the conclusion, should be statements.
• Standard Argument Form —a numbered breakdown of the parts of an argument (conclusion and all premises).
• Premise Indicators —terms that signal that a premise, or reason, is coming.
• Conclusion Indicator —terms that signal that a conclusion, or claim, is coming.
• Support —anything used as proof or reasoning for an argument.  This includes evidence, experience, and logic.
• Warrant —the connection made between the support and the reasons of an argument.
• Counterargument —an opposing argument to the one you make.  An argument can have multiple counterarguments.
• Complex Arguments –these are formed by more than individual premises that point to a conclusion.  Complex arguments may have layers to them, including an intermediate argument that may act as both a conclusion (with its own premises) and a premise (for the main conclusion).

CC Licensed Content, Shared Previously

About Writing: A Guide,  Robin Jeffrey, CC-BY.

A Concise Introduction to Logic, Craig DeLancey, CC-BY-NC-SA.

English 112: College Composition II ,  Lumen Learning, CC-BY-SA.

English Composition 1 ,  Lumen Learning,  CC-BY-SA.

Frameworks for Academic Writing ,   Stephen Poulter, CC-BY-NC-SA.

Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking,   Matthew J. Van Cleave, CC-BY.

Methods of Discovery,  Pavel Zemilanski,  CC-BY-NC-SA.

Writing for Success ,  CC-BY-NC-SA.

Writing in College: From Competence to Excellence ,  Amy Guptill, CC-BY-NC-SA.

Image Credits

Figure 3.1 “Opinion vs Argument,” by Kalyca Schultz, Virginia Western Community College,  derivative image from original by ijmaki, pixabay, CC-0.

Figure 3.2 “Argument Diagram,” Virginia Western Community College, derivative image using “ Thin Brace Down ,” by pathoschild, Wikimedia, CC-BY-SA 3.0.

Figure 3.3 “Common Premise Indicators,” by Kalyca Schultz, Virginia Western Community College, CC-0.

Figure 3.4 “Common Conclusion Indicators,” by Kalyca Schultz, Virginia Western Community College, CC-0.

Figure 3.5 Untitled, by Matthew Van Cleave, from Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking , CC-BY.

Figure 3.6 Untitled, by Matthew Van Cleave, from Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking ,   CC-BY.

Argument Copyright © 2021 by Kirsten DeVries is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Writing Center
• Current Students
• Online Only Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Parents & Family
• Alumni & Friends
• Community & Business
• Student Life
• Video Introduction
• Become a Writing Assistant
• All Writers
• Graduate Students
• ELL Students
• Campus and Community
• Testimonials
• Encouraging Writing Center Use
• Incentives and Requirements
• Open Educational Resources
• How We Help
• Get to Know Us
• Conversation Partners Program
• Weekly Updates
• Workshop Series
• Professors Talk Writing
• Computer Lab
• Starting a Writing Center
• A Note to Instructors
• Annotated Bibliography
• Literature Review
• Research Proposal
• Argument Essay
• Rhetorical Analysis

Crafting a Thesis Statement

What is it?

A thesis statement concisely expresses the argument an essay makes and indicates to readers what the writer knows about the topic. Particularly in shorter essays, the thesis statement is often one sentence placed at the end of the introduction; the body of the essay then provides evidence to prove that thesis. Remember that your thesis is not the same thing as your topic; your thesis is an argument about your topic.

Creating a thesis

A good thesis is the result of a lengthy process involving brainstorming, critical reading, [usually] researching, and revising. You cannot determine your final stance on a topic until you have reflected on the available evidence. 

• Consider your topic carefully. Do not choose a topic just because you think it will be easy to research or write a lot about it. What really interests you? What relates to the class? What fits your assignment instructions?
• Narrow your topic by determining a question you want to answer about it. What issues/ideas are debated about this topic? What questions do you have? What do you want to know more about? What is your connection to the topic? Ask yourself who , what , when , where , and why questions to stimulate your thinking: What happened to the dinosaurs? When did it happen? Who were their predators? Where did they live? Why did they become extinct?
• Determine a tentative claim stating an argument about your chosen aspect of the topic. This is your working thesis . As you continue to develop or research evidence to support your working thesis, consider how new information affects it. Your thesis statement will likely change throughout your writing process; never be afraid to adjust it! 

Elements of an effective thesis

An effective thesis states a debatable claim that can be supported with evidence..

A thesis statement is not a fact; it takes a position about a fact – a position that not everyone will support.

•    
• Facts Dinosaurs became extinct millions of years ago.
• Thesis Based on geological and paleontological evidence, a giant meteor striking the earth probably caused the extinction of dinosaurs. 

AN EFFECTIVE THESIS IS NEITHER TOO BROAD NOR TOO NARROW

To strike a balance between broad and narrow, you must be as specific as possible while also ensuring you will be able to find sufficient evidence to support your claim. Consider the length of your paper: a two-page paper needs a much more specific thesis than a longer paper. 

Too Broad : Dinosaurs became extinct for many complex reasons.

Too Narrow : The Tyrannosaurus Rex became extinct because its tiny arms limited its ability to hunt the small dinosaurs increasingly common in its environment.

Balanced : Dinosaurs became extinct because they were unable to adapt to their changing environment.

Contact Info

Kennesaw Campus 1000 Chastain Road Kennesaw, GA 30144

Marietta Campus 1100 South Marietta Pkwy Marietta, GA 30060

Campus Maps

Phone 470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

kennesaw.edu/info

Media Resources

Resources For

Related Links

• Financial Aid
• Degrees, Majors & Programs
• Job Opportunities
• Campus Security
• Global Education
• Sustainability
• Accessibility

470-KSU-INFO (470-578-4636)

© 2024 Kennesaw State University. All Rights Reserved.

• Privacy Statement
• Accreditation
• Emergency Information
• Report a Concern
• Open Records
• Human Trafficking Notice

The top 10 thesis defense questions (+ how to prepare strong answers)

Crafting a thesis is significant, but defending it often feels like the ultimate test. While nerve-wracking, proper preparation can make it manageable. Prepare for your thesis defense with insights on the top questions you can expect, including strategies for answering convincingly.

Mastering the thesis defense: cultivate a success mindset

Confidence enables you to present your research with conviction, while composure allows you to navigate any challenges with grace and clarity.

Remember, you know your thesis best, so trust in your expertise.

Stay composed and focused, relying on your thorough preparation. If you encounter a question you can’t answer, gracefully guide the conversation back to familiar topics.

By embracing these principles and staying confident and adaptable, you’ll navigate your thesis defense with ease.

Question 1: Why did you choose this particular topic for your research?

Moreover, discuss the gaps you identified in the existing literature that motivated you to contribute to your field. What deficiencies or unanswered questions did you observe? How did these gaps inspire you to embark on your research journey with the aim of filling these voids? By articulating the specific shortcomings in the current body of knowledge, you demonstrate a nuanced understanding of your research area and underscore the significance of your work.

Question 2: How does your research contribute to the existing body of knowledge?

This question delves into the vital role your research plays within the existing body of knowledge, urging you to articulate its significance and impact. It’s not merely about the subject matter you’ve studied, but also about the unique contributions and advancements your research brings to your field. To effectively respond, delve into the intricacies of your work and its implications for the broader academic landscape.

Illuminate how your findings could influence future research trajectories. Explore potential avenues for further inquiry that emerge from your research findings. Consider how your work opens up new questions or areas of exploration for future researchers. By identifying these potential research directions, you demonstrate the forward-looking nature of your work and its potential to shape the future trajectory of your field.

Question 3: What are the key findings of your research?

Furthermore, relate these findings to the broader implications they hold for your field. Articulate how your research contributes to advancing knowledge or addressing pressing issues within your academic discipline. Consider the potential impact of your findings on theory, practice, or policy, highlighting their relevance and significance within the larger scholarly community.

Question 4: Can you defend your research methodology?

Defending your research methodology entails a comprehensive understanding of its rationale, alignment with research objectives, and acknowledgment of potential limitations. It’s not merely about explaining the methods employed but also justifying why they were chosen over alternative approaches. To effectively respond, delve into the intricacies of your methodology and its implications for the study.

Be prepared to discuss the limitations inherent in your chosen methodology and how you mitigated them. Acknowledge any constraints or shortcomings associated with the selected approach, such as potential biases, sample size limitations, or data collection challenges. Demonstrate your awareness of these limitations and discuss the strategies implemented to address or minimize their impact on the validity and reliability of your findings.

Question 5: How did you analyze the data and what challenges did you encounter?

Begin by outlining the techniques used for data analysis. Describe the specific methods, tools, and software employed to process and interpret the data collected. Whether it involved quantitative statistical analysis, qualitative coding techniques, or a combination of both, provide insights into the analytical framework guiding your study. Additionally, discuss the rationale behind the chosen analytical approach and how it aligns with the research objectives and questions.

In summary, when addressing inquiries about data analysis, consider the following key points:

Question 6: What theoretical frameworks or references underpin your research?

Begin by naming the key theories and seminal works that guided your research. Identify the theoretical frameworks that provided the conceptual scaffolding for your study, as well as the seminal works that shaped your understanding of the research area. Discuss how these theories and references informed your research design, methodology, and analytical approach, providing a theoretical lens through which to interpret your findings.

Elucidate on how these frameworks shaped your hypothesis and analysis. Describe how the theoretical perspectives and insights gleaned from seminal works informed the development of your research questions, hypotheses, and analytical framework. Discuss the ways in which these theoretical frameworks guided your data collection and interpretation, influencing the selection of variables, measures, and analytical techniques employed in your study.

In summary, when addressing inquiries about theoretical frameworks, consider the following key points:

Question 7: How did you address ethical considerations in your research?

When addressing ethical considerations in your research, it’s essential to demonstrate a commitment to upholding ethical standards and protecting the rights and well-being of participants. Responding to inquiries about ethical protocols involves explaining the steps taken to ensure ethical conduct throughout the research process, describing the consent process and data protection measures implemented, and mentioning any institutional review board (IRB) approvals obtained.

Mention any institutional ethics review board approvals you obtained. Highlight any formal ethical review processes or approvals obtained from relevant regulatory bodies, such as IRBs or ethics committees. Discuss how the research protocol was reviewed for compliance with ethical guidelines and standards, including considerations of participant welfare, informed consent procedures, and data protection measures. By acknowledging the oversight and approval of institutional review bodies, you demonstrate your commitment to ethical integrity and accountability in conducting research involving human subjects.

Question 8: In what ways does your research contribute to the field?

Begin by detailing the novel insights your thesis provides. Articulate the key findings, discoveries, or perspectives that distinguish your research from existing literature and contribute to advancing knowledge within your field. Discuss how your study fills gaps in current understanding, challenges established assumptions, or offers innovative approaches to addressing pressing issues, highlighting its potential to generate new avenues of inquiry and broaden the scope of scholarly discourse.

In summary, when addressing inquiries about the contributions of your research to the field, consider the following key points:

Question 9: How did you ensure your research was free from bias?

Describe any blind or double-blind procedures employed in the study. Explain how blinding techniques were used to prevent bias in data collection, analysis, or interpretation. This may involve withholding certain information from researchers or participants to minimize the potential for conscious or unconscious bias to influence the results. Discuss how these procedures were implemented and their impact on enhancing the credibility and impartiality of the research outcomes.

Question 10: Where can future research go from here?

When considering the potential trajectory of your research topic, it’s essential to identify areas where further investigation could yield valuable insights, discuss unexplored questions that emerged from your research, and reflect on the limitations of your study as starting points for future research endeavors. Responding to inquiries about the future direction of research involves suggesting fruitful areas for further investigation, highlighting unresolved questions, and leveraging the limitations of your study as opportunities for future exploration.

Reflect on the limitations of your study as starting points for future research. Acknowledge any constraints, biases, or methodological shortcomings that may have influenced the outcomes or interpretations of your study. Discuss how these limitations provide opportunities for future research to refine methodologies, address confounding variables, or explore alternative theoretical frameworks. Consider how addressing these limitations could enhance the validity, reliability, and generalizability of future research findings within your field.

Master Academia

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox, how to harness theoretical and conceptual frameworks for groundbreaking research, 25 short graduation quotes: inspiration in four words or less, related articles, first meeting with your dissertation supervisor: what to expect, left your dissertation too late ways to take action now, sample emails to your thesis supervisor, 3 inspiring master’s thesis acknowledgement examples.

Home » Language » What are Premises and Conclusions in an Argument

What are Premises and Conclusions in an Argument

In the field of critical thinking, an argument is a statement or a group of statements that includes at least one premise and conclusion. Therefore, it can be said that premises and conclusions are the building blocks of an argument.

Let’s see what they are in detail here.

What is a Premise in an Argument

A premise is a statement in an argument that provides evidence or reasons to form a conclusion. It contains the information that leads your audience to believe that your argument is true. An argument can have one or more premises.

What is a Conclusion in an Argument

A conclusion in an argument is the statement the premises support; it indicates what the arguer is trying to prove to his audience. An argument can have only one conclusion.

Let’s describe the two terms, premise and conclusion, using some examples.

Examples of Premise and Conclusion

• Since small fish is rich in calcium, it follows that your body will benefit if you eat them.

The above argument can be categorized into two parts: premise and conclusion. The premise is that small fish is rich in calcium; the conclusion is that your body will benefit if you eat them. This argument has only one premise.

Note that this argument can be also written as follows.

Your body will benefit from eating small fish because it is a rich source of calcium.

Here, the conclusion is presented first and the premise is connected to it by the linking word  because . It is important to remember that the conclusion and the premise have no set order in an argument.

Given below are some more examples of arguments with their premises and conclusions.

• I have heard that cats with long hair have lots of fleas. They also shed all over the house, so you should not get a long-haired cat.

Premise 1: Cats with long hair have lots of fleas.

Premise 2: Cats with long hair shed all over the house

Conclusion: Don’t get a cat with long hair

• He is not good at his work, so he doesn’t deserve a raise.

Premise: He is not good at his work.

Conclusion: He doesn’t deserve a raise.

• No one under eighteen-years-old can vote. Jim cannot vote because he is not yet eighteen.

Premise 1: No one under eighteen-years-old can vote

Premise 2: Jim is under eighteen.

Conclusion: Jim cannot vote.

5. A good society treasures its dissidents and mavericks because it needs the creative thinking that produces new hypotheses, expanded means, a larger set of alternatives, and, in general, the vigorous conversation induced by fresh ideas. (Nel Noddings, Philosophy of Education , 1995)

Premise: A good society needs creative thinking that produces new hypotheses, expanded means, a larger set of alternatives, and, in general, the vigorous conversation induced by fresh ideas.

Conclusion: A good society treasures its dissidents and mavericks.

How to Differentiate Premise and Conclusion in an Argument

Look at the indicator words.

The easiest way to distinguish premises and conclusions in an argument is to learn their indicator words. Indicator words, also known as joining words, act as transitional words between ideas; the transitional words that occur with premises and conclusions are not the same.

Some examples of indicator words that can be found with premises include because, since, given that, considering that, but, and, or, etc.

Some examples of indicator words and phrases that can be found with conclusions include, therefore, thus, which follows that, consequently, so, hence, etc.

• A premise in an argument is the part that supports the conclusion with evidence and reasons.
• A conclusion in an argument is the main point the arguer is trying to prove.
• An argument can contain one conclusion and one or more premises.

About the Author: Hasa

Hasanthi is a seasoned content writer and editor with over 8 years of experience. Armed with a BA degree in English and a knack for digital marketing, she explores her passions for literature, history, culture, and food through her engaging and informative writing.

​You May Also Like These

Module: Academic Argument

Introduction to argumentative thesis statements, what you’ll learn to do: evaluate argumentative thesis statements.

An academic argument asserts a claim and supports that claim with evidence. The goal of an argument is to convince readers that the writer’s position is reasonable, valid, and worthy of consideration. Therefore, an argumentative thesis statement needs to be not only clear and focused, but also debatable, assertive, and reasoned. Additionally, an argumentative thesis must be able to be supported with evidence.

• Outcome: Argumentative Thesis Statements. Provided by : University of Mississippi. License : CC BY: Attribution

Transcription Service for Your Academic Paper

Start Transcription now

Editing & Proofreading for Your Research Paper

Get it proofread now

Online Printing & Binding with Free Express Delivery

Configure binding now

• Academic essay overview
• The writing process
• Structuring academic essays
• Types of academic essays
• Academic writing overview
• Sentence structure
• Academic writing process
• Improving your academic writing
• Titles and headings
• APA style overview
• APA citation & referencing
• APA structure & sections
• Citation & referencing
• Structure and sections
• APA examples overview
• Commonly used citations
• Other examples
• British English vs. American English
• Chicago style overview
• Chicago citation & referencing
• Chicago structure & sections
• Chicago style examples
• Citing sources overview
• Citation format
• Citation examples
• College essay overview
• Application
• How to write a college essay
• Types of college essays
• Commonly confused words
• Definitions
• Dissertation overview
• Dissertation structure & sections
• Dissertation writing process
• Graduate school overview
• Application & admission
• Study abroad
• Master degree
• Harvard referencing overview
• Language rules overview
• Grammatical rules & structures
• Parts of speech
• Punctuation
• Methodology overview
• Analyzing data
• Experiments
• Observations
• Inductive vs. Deductive
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative
• Types of validity
• Types of reliability
• Sampling methods
• Theories & Concepts
• Types of research studies
• Types of variables
• MLA style overview
• MLA examples
• MLA citation & referencing
• MLA structure & sections
• Plagiarism overview
• Plagiarism checker
• Types of plagiarism
• Printing production overview
• Research bias overview
• Types of research bias
• Example sections
• Types of research papers
• Research process overview
• Problem statement
• Research proposal
• Research topic
• Statistics overview
• Levels of measurment
• Frequency distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Measures of variability
• Hypothesis testing
• Parameters & test statistics
• Types of distributions
• Correlation
• Effect size
• Hypothesis testing assumptions
• Types of ANOVAs
• Types of chi-square
• Statistical data
• Statistical models
• Spelling mistakes
• Tips overview
• Academic writing tips
• Dissertation tips
• Sources tips
• Working with sources overview
• Evaluating sources
• Finding sources
• Including sources
• Types of sources

Your Step to Success

Transcription Service for Your Paper

Printing & Binding with 3D Live Preview

Thesis Defense – a guide to prepare best

How do you like this article cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• 1 Definition: Thesis Defense
• 2 In a Nutshell
• 3 Before the Thesis Defense
• 4 What happens in a Thesis Defense?
• 5 What to include?
• 6 Tools for Thesis Defense
• 7 Thesis Defense Anxiety
• 8 Manage Thesis Defense Anxiety

Definition: Thesis Defense

A thesis defense is an act of presenting your work to a panel of professors so they can grade your presentation abilities. In retrospect, the argument is essential to ascertain that you understood the topic. You have to hand in your paper first so that the lecturer can grade it before you appear for the defense.

As a university student, you need to hand in a high-quality thesis paper and defend it before a panel of professors. So what is this that takes place during a thesis defense? Read along to find out.

In a Nutshell

So, there you have it. These tips should help you present your thesis defense and ace it. Remember that:

• You should present facts that are in the paper. Do not add any new information
• Make the thesis defense as enjoyable as possible
• Arrive early enough
• Do not exceed your allocated time
• Confidence goes a long way

Printing Your Thesis With BachelorPrint

• High-quality bindings with customizable embossing
• 3D live preview to check your work before ordering
• Free express delivery

Configure your binding now!

to the print shop

Before the Thesis Defense

Before the day of the thesis defense, the qualifying students receive a timetable that shows the chronology of how the day will be. You are required to keep time, or else you will have to wait until the next allocated defense to present your paper. To qualify as a defending student, you have to hand in your paper at least one month before the thesis defense date.

What happens in a Thesis Defense?

Once you get to the hall, you need to introduce yourself and your topic, then present your paper to the lecturers. The professors will allocate you ¾ of the allotted time for the thesis defense. The remaining time is used up in the question and answer forum. Prepare yourself to answer several questions, such as:

• Your plans after completing the research
• The limitations you faced
• Things that you would change if given a chance
• How you chose your target audience
• How you intend to further your study on the subject
• The reasons for choosing your topic
• The most significant deductions you learned from the survey
• Reasons for choosing your research methodology, etc.

In some cases, the board may ask you to summarize your deductions from the study. The questions asked are not standard, which means you have to be thoroughly prepared to answer whatever the panel throws your way during the thesis defense. Other things that take place during the thesis defense include:

• Deliberations – At this point, the board of lecturers will ask you to leave the room as they deliberate on your thesis defense performance. They will then decide whether you move to the next level or you will defend again.
• Verdict – Finally, the team will invite you back in and tell you how you performed in the thesis defense. These panel members may ask you to make a few corrections before you can go ahead and publish your paper. You have to present your corrections to your facilitator, who will then give you the go-ahead to publish.
• Signing – The members will then sign your document to ascertain that you were part of the thesis defense team on the selected date.

How much time does a Thesis Defense take and how many people should be in the room?

During a thesis defense, each student appears before the panel individually. The facilitators will ask you questions concerning your topic to see if you fully grasped the concept. Each thesis defense will vary from the other depending on the technicality of your paper and the kind of degree you are pursuing.

• Undergraduate degree – Your panel may include at least three lecturers from your faculty. Additionally, the defense may last up to one hour.
• Masters degree – You get to interact with four professors at this level, and each student is allotted 1½ hours to present and answer questions.
• Ph.D. degree – Considering that this is the highest education level, five professors avail themselves to vet you. More so, you may have to engage them for two hours.

Thesis printing & binding

You are already done writing your thesis and need a high quality printing & binding service? Then you are right to choose BachelorPrint! Check out our 24-hour online printing service. For more information click the button below :

What to include?

A thesis defense follows a particular format, which cuts across all types of degrees, which is:

• Introduction  – Explain the need for this study
• Literature review  – Explain what other scholars have found on the subject
• Research methodology  – What research method did you use, and why did you use it?
• Findings and discussions  – In your research, what were the key deductions that you came upon?
• Implications, limitations, suggestions, and  conclusion  – Here, you have to exhaust the setbacks you encountered during the study, the consequences that your target audience will face if they do not follow the deductions, and then finally sum up the discussions.

Tools for Thesis Defense

Considering that a thesis defense may take you at least 45 minutes to present, it is essential to make the presentation lively. So, you can incorporate a slide show and use images to make it less wordy. Bullet points also make the text easier to digest as opposed to a block of text. So, a laptop and a projector will help you ace your presentation.

Thesis Defense Anxiety

Standing before a panel of people waiting to hear how you conducted your research can be intimidating. This is especially so considering that you will be standing before a group of professors, who you believe to be superior to you in regards to the topic knowledge. More so, if you are not familiar with public speaking, it is easy to develop stage fright while defending.

Manage Thesis Defense Anxiety

In case you find yourself fidgeting before you begin presenting, use the following tips to help you get your composure back.

• If you have a problem with eye-balling the lecturers, look at the tips of their foreheads instead.
• Take a few seconds to breathe in and out so you can stabilize your speech if you begin to stammer.
• Go into the room with a positive mind, knowing that you will do your best.
• Most importantly, rehearse your thesis defense severally before the D-day.

What is a thesis defense?

A scholarly thesis defense is a forum that allows students to present their paper’s contents and defend their thesis topic before a panel of professors. The student is then required to answer all questions asked by the lecturers. At the end, the student is required to leave the room whilst the professors decide whether the thesis is ready to be published, or if it needs corrections.

How long is a thesis defense?

There is no general length for a thesis defense. The defense of a master’s thesis will take longer than the defense of a bachelor’s thesis. You will need to fit in an introduction , a literature review, your findings and even more into the time frame for your thesis defense, so it’s important that you’re well prepared. All in all, it depends on your paper and your academic field. Usually the thesis defense will last between one and two hours, but it also could be less than one hour.

What is the oral defense of a thesis?

Oral defense is simply another name for your thesis defense. If you’ve completed your thesis, you are required to defend it in front of a panel of professors. It is designed so that the committee can ensure that the students completely understand their thesis topic . The oral thesis defense is an examination of a completed body of work. Students will be assigned a date to defend their thesis.

What happens after the thesis defense?

After your thesis defense, you will be told to leave the room whilst the panel discusses your results. There are normally 2 outcomes. You may need to make changes to your thesis’ formatting or content. If this is the case, don’t stress! You’re able to try the thesis defense again once you’ve incorporated any required changes. The preferred outcome is that the panel is happy with your thesis and it’s then ready to be signed and published.

What defines a good thesis defense?

The thesis defense is the final step for your academic work. It’s important that you’re prepared and you’ve outlined what you’re going to say in each section of the defense. You need to know your thesis statement better than the back of your hand, otherwise you risk being sidetracked. Just like your thesis itself, your thesis defense has a specific structure. You can read more about this further on in the article. Try and prepare yourself for the potential types of questions that the professors will ask you so that you don’t have to think about your answers on the spot.

Bachelor Print is the most amazing company ever to print or bind academic work...

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential, while others help us to improve this website and your experience.

• External Media

Individual Privacy Preferences

Cookie Details Privacy Policy Imprint

Here you will find an overview of all cookies used. You can give your consent to whole categories or display further information and select certain cookies.

Accept all Save

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.

Show Cookie Information Hide Cookie Information

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.

Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.

Privacy Policy Imprint

• Page Content
• Sidebar Content
• Main Navigation
• Quick links

• All TIP Sheets
• Writing a Summary
• Writing Paragraphs
• Writing an Analogy
• Writing a Descriptive Essay
• Writing a Persuasive Essay
• Writing a Compare/Contrast Paper
• Writing Cause and Effect Papers
• Writing a Process Paper
• Writing a Classification Paper
• Definitions of Writing Terms
• How to Write Clearly
• Active and Passive Voice
• Developing a Thesis and Supporting Arguments
• Writing Introductions & Conclusions
• How to Structure an Essay: Avoiding Six Weaknesses in Papers
• Writing Book Reports
• Writing about Literature
• Writing about Non-Fiction Books
• Poetry: Meter and Related Topics
• Revising and Editing
• Proofreading

Developing A Thesis and Supporting Auguments

TIP Sheet DEVELOPING A THESIS AND SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS

There's something you should know: Your college instructors have a hidden agenda. You may be alarmed to hear this-yet your achievement of their "other" purpose may very well be the most important part of your education. For every writing assignment has, at the least, these two other purposes:

To teach you to state your case and prove it in a clear, appropriate, and lively manner To teach you to structure your thinking.

Consequently, all expository writing, in which you formulate a thesis and attempt to prove it, is an opportunity to practice rigorous, focused thinking habits that can result not only in better papers, but in sharper analytical skills across the board.

This TIP Sheet addresses the following steps common to any kind of non-fiction writing:

Choosing a subject. Limiting your subject. Crafting a thesis statement. Identifying supporting arguments. Revising your thesis. Writing strong topic sentences that support the thesis.

It is during these early stages of writing, particularly in the identification of supporting arguments, that students are most likely to flounder and procrastinate, and when the strength of a paper's thesis is frequently diluted for lack of rigorous thinking. Here we will adapt Aristotle's method of "discovering arguments" to help identify and develop a strong thesis. You may adapt this method to any nonfiction writing, including essays, research papers, book reports, or critical reviews.

1. Choosing a Subject Suppose your instructor asks you to write an essay about a holiday experience. Within this general subject area, you choose a subject that holds your interest and about which you can readily get information: you were in downtown Chico on the morning of St. Patrick's Day and witnessed some unusual behavior–a melee broke out, resulting in injuries to bystanders and property damage to nearby cars. You wish to write about this.

2. Limiting Your Subject What will you name your topic? Clearly, "student behavior" is too broad; student behavior would necessarily include behavior by every kind of student, everywhere, at all times, and this could very well fill a book and require a master's degree in psychology. Simply calling your subject "St. Patrick's Day" would be misleading. You decide to limit the subject to "student behavior on St. Patrick's Day." After some thought, you decide that a better, more specific subject might be "unruly college student behavior such as that witnessed in front of La Salle's in downtown Chico last St. Patrick's Day." (Be aware that this is not the title of your essay. You will title it much later.) You have now limited your subject and are ready to craft a thesis.

3. Crafting a thesis statement While your subject may be a noun phrase such as the one above, your thesis must be a complete sentence that declares where you stand on the subject. A thesis statement should almost always be in the form of a declarative sentence. Suppose you believe that some of the student behavior in front of La Salle's on St. Patrick's Day was very bad; your thesis statement may be, "Student behavior such as demonstrated in front of La Salle's last St. Patrick's Day is an embarrassment to the college community." Or, conversely, perhaps you think the behavior of the students was just a little high-spirited, but not really so bad as the newspaper made it out to be. Your thesis might be, "A college town has to expect a certain amount of student glee on holidays such as St. Patrick's Day; cracked auto glass and a couple of bruises are a small price to pay for all the commerce college students bring to downtown."

4. Identifying supporting arguments Now you must gather material, or find arguments to support your thesis statement. Aristotle taught his students to examine any claim by "discovering arguments." You will use some of his techniques to formulate support for your claim. Brainstorm, adapting the questions below as a guide, and writing down even the ideas that don't appear to you very promising–you can sort through them later.

• Definition: What is good behavior? What is bad behavior? What is appropriate behavior on St. Patrick's Day? What is appropriate behavior in other settings?
• Comparison/Similarity: How was behavior last St. Patrick's Day similar to behavior in years past? How was behavior in front of La Salle's similar to behavior in other parts of downtown that day? How was this behavior similar to behavior in other college towns on that day?
• Comparison/Dissimilarity: How did behavior last St. Patrick's Day differ from behavior in years past? How did behavior in front of La Salle's differ from behavior in other parts of downtown that day? How did this behavior differ from student behavior in other college towns on that day?
• Comparison/Degree: To what degree was student behavior worse than in years past? To what degree was this behavior worse than in other parts of downtown? To what degree was this behavior worse than student behavior in other college towns?
• Relationship (cause and effect): What causes good behavior? What are the results of good behavior? What causes bad behavior? What are the results of bad behavior? What were the specific results of the behavior on St. Patrick's Day? What were the specific causes of the behavior on St. Patrick's Day?
• Circumstance: Has this kind of behavior occurred in the past? Should this behavior be permitted in the future? What is possible–that is, in this case, is it possible for students to behave appropriately even if bored, drunk, or provoked? Is it possible for downtown merchants and bystanders to absorb the costs of property damage?
• Testimony: What are the opinions of others about student behavior in front of La Salle's on St. Patrick's Day (for example, students who participated, students who observed, students who were injured, students who avoided downtown Chico altogether on St. Patrick's Day, city council members, the police chief, the proprietor of La Salle's, the owner of the damaged car, nearby business owners)?
• The Good: Would the results of enforced good conduct be "good"? Would the results of enforced good conduct cause unintended or unforeseen problems? What is fair to whom?
• The Expedient: Is it desirable to require better conduct next St. Patrick's Day? Should authorities force better conduct next year? Should St. Patrick's Day celebrations be cancelled? Should everyone just relax about this incident and let students celebrate? Should students be asked to improve their conduct voluntarily next year? Should Associated Students provide an education campaign about respect for others, provide alternative activities, or additional patrols?

After brainstorming, you should have lots of material to support a thesis statement.

5. Revising your thesis Notice that in the sentence above we used the phrase "a thesis statement" rather than "your thesis statement." This is because, as you examine your thesis statement through the Aristotelian method, you may discover that you were wrong. At this point, you should either revise your thesis or choose another subject and begin again. Revising your opinion in light of convincing evidence is the beginning of wisdom. Besides, even if it is possible to proceed with the essay as you first envisioned it, you will find it more difficult to defend a thesis you have previously discredited in your notes.

6. Crafting topic sentences that support the thesis Using ideas you gathered using Aristotle's method, construct three to five topic sentences that support your claim. These topic sentences will become the framework for the rest of your paper. You will further support each with examples and citations from personal interviews, newspaper articles, or other appropriate references.

The melee was not caused by the students themselves; rather, an elderly homeless man spat on someone's shoe, causing her to move away suddenly, and a chain reaction occurred in the line waiting to go into La Salle's. (from examination of Aristotle's Relationship and Testimony)

Additional policemen would only increase tension in the downtown area, making altercations more likely. (from examination of Aristotle's The Good and The Expedient)

Trying to keep college students away from downtown on holidays like this would cause lost revenues for downtown merchants. (from examination of Aristotle's The Expedient)

As you continue to draft your paper you will, of course, revise these sentences as necessary to more precisely reflect your ideas and the support you gather for them. By this time you should have a good knowledge of your subject and know where you want to go with it. It will now be possible for you to find enough additional supporting material to complete your essay.

Home | Calendars | Library | Bookstore | Directory | Apply Now | Search for Classes | Register | Online Classes  | MyBC Portal MyBC -->

Butte College | 3536 Butte Campus Drive, Oroville CA 95965 | General Information (530) 895-2511

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• How to Write a Thesis Statement | 4 Steps & Examples

How to Write a Thesis Statement | 4 Steps & Examples

Published on January 11, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on August 15, 2023 by Eoghan Ryan.

A thesis statement is a sentence that sums up the central point of your paper or essay . It usually comes near the end of your introduction .

Your thesis will look a bit different depending on the type of essay you’re writing. But the thesis statement should always clearly state the main idea you want to get across. Everything else in your essay should relate back to this idea.

You can write your thesis statement by following four simple steps:

• Start with a question
• Write your initial answer
• Develop your answer
• Refine your thesis statement

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is a thesis statement, placement of the thesis statement, step 1: start with a question, step 2: write your initial answer, step 3: develop your answer, step 4: refine your thesis statement, types of thesis statements, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about thesis statements.

A thesis statement summarizes the central points of your essay. It is a signpost telling the reader what the essay will argue and why.

The best thesis statements are:

• Concise: A good thesis statement is short and sweet—don’t use more words than necessary. State your point clearly and directly in one or two sentences.
• Contentious: Your thesis shouldn’t be a simple statement of fact that everyone already knows. A good thesis statement is a claim that requires further evidence or analysis to back it up.
• Coherent: Everything mentioned in your thesis statement must be supported and explained in the rest of your paper.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

The thesis statement generally appears at the end of your essay introduction or research paper introduction .

The spread of the internet has had a world-changing effect, not least on the world of education. The use of the internet in academic contexts and among young people more generally is hotly debated. For many who did not grow up with this technology, its effects seem alarming and potentially harmful. This concern, while understandable, is misguided. The negatives of internet use are outweighed by its many benefits for education: the internet facilitates easier access to information, exposure to different perspectives, and a flexible learning environment for both students and teachers.

You should come up with an initial thesis, sometimes called a working thesis , early in the writing process . As soon as you’ve decided on your essay topic , you need to work out what you want to say about it—a clear thesis will give your essay direction and structure.

You might already have a question in your assignment, but if not, try to come up with your own. What would you like to find out or decide about your topic?

For example, you might ask:

After some initial research, you can formulate a tentative answer to this question. At this stage it can be simple, and it should guide the research process and writing process .

Now you need to consider why this is your answer and how you will convince your reader to agree with you. As you read more about your topic and begin writing, your answer should get more detailed.

In your essay about the internet and education, the thesis states your position and sketches out the key arguments you’ll use to support it.

The negatives of internet use are outweighed by its many benefits for education because it facilitates easier access to information.

In your essay about braille, the thesis statement summarizes the key historical development that you’ll explain.

The invention of braille in the 19th century transformed the lives of blind people, allowing them to participate more actively in public life.

A strong thesis statement should tell the reader:

• Why you hold this position
• What they’ll learn from your essay
• The key points of your argument or narrative

The final thesis statement doesn’t just state your position, but summarizes your overall argument or the entire topic you’re going to explain. To strengthen a weak thesis statement, it can help to consider the broader context of your topic.

These examples are more specific and show that you’ll explore your topic in depth.

Your thesis statement should match the goals of your essay, which vary depending on the type of essay you’re writing:

• In an argumentative essay , your thesis statement should take a strong position. Your aim in the essay is to convince your reader of this thesis based on evidence and logical reasoning.
• In an expository essay , you’ll aim to explain the facts of a topic or process. Your thesis statement doesn’t have to include a strong opinion in this case, but it should clearly state the central point you want to make, and mention the key elements you’ll explain.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

A thesis statement is a sentence that sums up the central point of your paper or essay . Everything else you write should relate to this key idea.

The thesis statement is essential in any academic essay or research paper for two main reasons:

• It gives your writing direction and focus.
• It gives the reader a concise summary of your main point.

Without a clear thesis statement, an essay can end up rambling and unfocused, leaving your reader unsure of exactly what you want to say.

Follow these four steps to come up with a thesis statement :

• Ask a question about your topic .
• Write your initial answer.
• Develop your answer by including reasons.
• Refine your answer, adding more detail and nuance.

The thesis statement should be placed at the end of your essay introduction .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, August 15). How to Write a Thesis Statement | 4 Steps & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 11, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/thesis-statement/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write an essay introduction | 4 steps & examples, how to write topic sentences | 4 steps, examples & purpose, academic paragraph structure | step-by-step guide & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

What is a thesis | A Complete Guide with Examples

Table of Contents

A thesis is a comprehensive academic paper based on your original research that presents new findings, arguments, and ideas of your study. It’s typically submitted at the end of your master’s degree or as a capstone of your bachelor’s degree.

However, writing a thesis can be laborious, especially for beginners. From the initial challenge of pinpointing a compelling research topic to organizing and presenting findings, the process is filled with potential pitfalls.

Therefore, to help you, this guide talks about what is a thesis. Additionally, it offers revelations and methodologies to transform it from an overwhelming task to a manageable and rewarding academic milestone.

What is a thesis?

A thesis is an in-depth research study that identifies a particular topic of inquiry and presents a clear argument or perspective about that topic using evidence and logic.

Writing a thesis showcases your ability of critical thinking, gathering evidence, and making a compelling argument. Integral to these competencies is thorough research, which not only fortifies your propositions but also confers credibility to your entire study.

Furthermore, there's another phenomenon you might often confuse with the thesis: the ' working thesis .' However, they aren't similar and shouldn't be used interchangeably.

A working thesis, often referred to as a preliminary or tentative thesis, is an initial version of your thesis statement. It serves as a draft or a starting point that guides your research in its early stages.

As you research more and gather more evidence, your initial thesis (aka working thesis) might change. It's like a starting point that can be adjusted as you learn more. It's normal for your main topic to change a few times before you finalize it.

While a thesis identifies and provides an overarching argument, the key to clearly communicating the central point of that argument lies in writing a strong thesis statement.

What is a thesis statement?

A strong thesis statement (aka thesis sentence) is a concise summary of the main argument or claim of the paper. It serves as a critical anchor in any academic work, succinctly encapsulating the primary argument or main idea of the entire paper.

Typically found within the introductory section, a strong thesis statement acts as a roadmap of your thesis, directing readers through your arguments and findings. By delineating the core focus of your investigation, it offers readers an immediate understanding of the context and the gravity of your study.

Furthermore, an effectively crafted thesis statement can set forth the boundaries of your research, helping readers anticipate the specific areas of inquiry you are addressing.

Different types of thesis statements

A good thesis statement is clear, specific, and arguable. Therefore, it is necessary for you to choose the right type of thesis statement for your academic papers.

Thesis statements can be classified based on their purpose and structure. Here are the primary types of thesis statements:

Argumentative (or Persuasive) thesis statement

Purpose : To convince the reader of a particular stance or point of view by presenting evidence and formulating a compelling argument.

Example : Reducing plastic use in daily life is essential for environmental health.

Analytical thesis statement

Purpose : To break down an idea or issue into its components and evaluate it.

Example : By examining the long-term effects, social implications, and economic impact of climate change, it becomes evident that immediate global action is necessary.

Expository (or Descriptive) thesis statement

Purpose : To explain a topic or subject to the reader.

Example : The Great Depression, spanning the 1930s, was a severe worldwide economic downturn triggered by a stock market crash, bank failures, and reduced consumer spending.

Cause and effect thesis statement

Purpose : To demonstrate a cause and its resulting effect.

Example : Overuse of smartphones can lead to impaired sleep patterns, reduced face-to-face social interactions, and increased levels of anxiety.

Compare and contrast thesis statement

Purpose : To highlight similarities and differences between two subjects.

Example : "While both novels '1984' and 'Brave New World' delve into dystopian futures, they differ in their portrayal of individual freedom, societal control, and the role of technology."

When you write a thesis statement , it's important to ensure clarity and precision, so the reader immediately understands the central focus of your work.

What is the difference between a thesis and a thesis statement?

While both terms are frequently used interchangeably, they have distinct meanings.

A thesis refers to the entire research document, encompassing all its chapters and sections. In contrast, a thesis statement is a brief assertion that encapsulates the central argument of the research.

Here’s an in-depth differentiation table of a thesis and a thesis statement.

Now, to craft a compelling thesis, it's crucial to adhere to a specific structure. Let’s break down these essential components that make up a thesis structure

15 components of a thesis structure

Navigating a thesis can be daunting. However, understanding its structure can make the process more manageable.

Here are the key components or different sections of a thesis structure:

Your thesis begins with the title page. It's not just a formality but the gateway to your research.

Here, you'll prominently display the necessary information about you (the author) and your institutional details.

• Title of your thesis
• Your full name
• Your department
• Your institution and degree program
• Your submission date
• Your Supervisor's name (in some cases)
• Your Department or faculty (in some cases)
• Your University's logo (in some cases)
• Your Student ID (in some cases)

In a concise manner, you'll have to summarize the critical aspects of your research in typically no more than 200-300 words.

This includes the problem statement, methodology, key findings, and conclusions. For many, the abstract will determine if they delve deeper into your work, so ensure it's clear and compelling.

Acknowledgments

Research is rarely a solitary endeavor. In the acknowledgments section, you have the chance to express gratitude to those who've supported your journey.

This might include advisors, peers, institutions, or even personal sources of inspiration and support. It's a personal touch, reflecting the humanity behind the academic rigor.

Table of contents

A roadmap for your readers, the table of contents lists the chapters, sections, and subsections of your thesis.

By providing page numbers, you allow readers to navigate your work easily, jumping to sections that pique their interest.

List of figures and tables

Research often involves data, and presenting this data visually can enhance understanding. This section provides an organized listing of all figures and tables in your thesis.

It's a visual index, ensuring that readers can quickly locate and reference your graphical data.

Introduction

Here's where you introduce your research topic, articulate the research question or objective, and outline the significance of your study.

• Present the research topic : Clearly articulate the central theme or subject of your research.
• Background information : Ground your research topic, providing any necessary context or background information your readers might need to understand the significance of your study.
• Define the scope : Clearly delineate the boundaries of your research, indicating what will and won't be covered.
• Literature review : Introduce any relevant existing research on your topic, situating your work within the broader academic conversation and highlighting where your research fits in.
• State the research Question(s) or objective(s) : Clearly articulate the primary questions or objectives your research aims to address.
• Outline the study's structure : Give a brief overview of how the subsequent sections of your work will unfold, guiding your readers through the journey ahead.

The introduction should captivate your readers, making them eager to delve deeper into your research journey.

Literature review section

Your study correlates with existing research. Therefore, in the literature review section, you'll engage in a dialogue with existing knowledge, highlighting relevant studies, theories, and findings.

It's here that you identify gaps in the current knowledge, positioning your research as a bridge to new insights.

To streamline this process, consider leveraging AI tools. For example, the SciSpace literature review tool enables you to efficiently explore and delve into research papers, simplifying your literature review journey.

Methodology

In the research methodology section, you’ll detail the tools, techniques, and processes you employed to gather and analyze data. This section will inform the readers about how you approached your research questions and ensures the reproducibility of your study.

Here's a breakdown of what it should encompass:

• Research Design : Describe the overall structure and approach of your research. Are you conducting a qualitative study with in-depth interviews? Or is it a quantitative study using statistical analysis? Perhaps it's a mixed-methods approach?
• Data Collection : Detail the methods you used to gather data. This could include surveys, experiments, observations, interviews, archival research, etc. Mention where you sourced your data, the duration of data collection, and any tools or instruments used.
• Sampling : If applicable, explain how you selected participants or data sources for your study. Discuss the size of your sample and the rationale behind choosing it.
• Data Analysis : Describe the techniques and tools you used to process and analyze the data. This could range from statistical tests in quantitative research to thematic analysis in qualitative research.
• Validity and Reliability : Address the steps you took to ensure the validity and reliability of your findings to ensure that your results are both accurate and consistent.
• Ethical Considerations : Highlight any ethical issues related to your research and the measures you took to address them, including — informed consent, confidentiality, and data storage and protection measures.

Moreover, different research questions necessitate different types of methodologies. For instance:

• Experimental methodology : Often used in sciences, this involves a controlled experiment to discern causality.
• Qualitative methodology : Employed when exploring patterns or phenomena without numerical data. Methods can include interviews, focus groups, or content analysis.
• Quantitative methodology : Concerned with measurable data and often involves statistical analysis. Surveys and structured observations are common tools here.
• Mixed methods : As the name implies, this combines both qualitative and quantitative methodologies.

The Methodology section isn’t just about detailing the methods but also justifying why they were chosen. The appropriateness of the methods in addressing your research question can significantly impact the credibility of your findings.

Results (or Findings)

This section presents the outcomes of your research. It's crucial to note that the nature of your results may vary; they could be quantitative, qualitative, or a mix of both.

Quantitative results often present statistical data, showcasing measurable outcomes, and they benefit from tables, graphs, and figures to depict these data points.

Qualitative results , on the other hand, might delve into patterns, themes, or narratives derived from non-numerical data, such as interviews or observations.

Regardless of the nature of your results, clarity is essential. This section is purely about presenting the data without offering interpretations — that comes later in the discussion.

In the discussion section, the raw data transforms into valuable insights.

Start by revisiting your research question and contrast it with the findings. How do your results expand, constrict, or challenge current academic conversations?

Dive into the intricacies of the data, guiding the reader through its implications. Detail potential limitations transparently, signaling your awareness of the research's boundaries. This is where your academic voice should be resonant and confident.

Practical implications (Recommendation) section

Based on the insights derived from your research, this section provides actionable suggestions or proposed solutions.

Whether aimed at industry professionals or the general public, recommendations translate your academic findings into potential real-world actions. They help readers understand the practical implications of your work and how it can be applied to effect change or improvement in a given field.

When crafting recommendations, it's essential to ensure they're feasible and rooted in the evidence provided by your research. They shouldn't merely be aspirational but should offer a clear path forward, grounded in your findings.

The conclusion provides closure to your research narrative.

It's not merely a recap but a synthesis of your main findings and their broader implications. Reconnect with the research questions or hypotheses posited at the beginning, offering clear answers based on your findings.

Reflect on the broader contributions of your study, considering its impact on the academic community and potential real-world applications.

Lastly, the conclusion should leave your readers with a clear understanding of the value and impact of your study.

References (or Bibliography)

Every theory you've expounded upon, every data point you've cited, and every methodological precedent you've followed finds its acknowledgment here.

In references, it's crucial to ensure meticulous consistency in formatting, mirroring the specific guidelines of the chosen citation style .

Proper referencing helps to avoid plagiarism , gives credit to original ideas, and allows readers to explore topics of interest. Moreover, it situates your work within the continuum of academic knowledge.

To properly cite the sources used in the study, you can rely on online citation generator tools  to generate accurate citations!

Here’s more on how you can cite your sources.

Often, the depth of research produces a wealth of material that, while crucial, can make the core content of the thesis cumbersome. The appendix is where you mention extra information that supports your research but isn't central to the main text.

Whether it's raw datasets, detailed procedural methodologies, extended case studies, or any other ancillary material, the appendices ensure that these elements are archived for reference without breaking the main narrative's flow.

For thorough researchers and readers keen on meticulous details, the appendices provide a treasure trove of insights.

Glossary (optional)

In academics, specialized terminologies, and jargon are inevitable. However, not every reader is versed in every term.

The glossary, while optional, is a critical tool for accessibility. It's a bridge ensuring that even readers from outside the discipline can access, understand, and appreciate your work.

By defining complex terms and providing context, you're inviting a wider audience to engage with your research, enhancing its reach and impact.

Remember, while these components provide a structured framework, the essence of your thesis lies in the originality of your ideas, the rigor of your research, and the clarity of your presentation.

As you craft each section, keep your readers in mind, ensuring that your passion and dedication shine through every page.

Thesis examples

To further elucidate the concept of a thesis, here are illustrative examples from various fields:

Example 1 (History): Abolition, Africans, and Abstraction: the Influence of the ‘Noble Savage’ on British and French Antislavery Thought, 1787-1807 by Suchait Kahlon.

Example 2 (Climate Dynamics): Influence of external forcings on abrupt millennial-scale climate changes: a statistical modelling study by Takahito Mitsui · Michel Crucifix

Checklist for your thesis evaluation

Evaluating your thesis ensures that your research meets the standards of academia. Here's an elaborate checklist to guide you through this critical process.

Content and structure

• Is the thesis statement clear, concise, and debatable?
• Does the introduction provide sufficient background and context?
• Is the literature review comprehensive, relevant, and well-organized?
• Does the methodology section clearly describe and justify the research methods?
• Are the results/findings presented clearly and logically?
• Does the discussion interpret the results in light of the research question and existing literature?
• Is the conclusion summarizing the research and suggesting future directions or implications?

Clarity and coherence

• Is the writing clear and free of jargon?
• Are ideas and sections logically connected and flowing?
• Is there a clear narrative or argument throughout the thesis?

Research quality

• Is the research question significant and relevant?
• Are the research methods appropriate for the question?
• Is the sample size (if applicable) adequate?
• Are the data analysis techniques appropriate and correctly applied?
• Are potential biases or limitations addressed?

Originality and significance

• Does the thesis contribute new knowledge or insights to the field?
• Is the research grounded in existing literature while offering fresh perspectives?

Formatting and presentation

• Is the thesis formatted according to institutional guidelines?
• Are figures, tables, and charts clear, labeled, and referenced in the text?
• Is the bibliography or reference list complete and consistently formatted?
• Are appendices relevant and appropriately referenced in the main text?

Grammar and language

• Is the thesis free of grammatical and spelling errors?
• Is the language professional, consistent, and appropriate for an academic audience?
• Are quotations and paraphrased material correctly cited?

Feedback and revision

• Have you sought feedback from peers, advisors, or experts in the field?
• Have you addressed the feedback and made the necessary revisions?

Overall assessment

• Does the thesis as a whole feel cohesive and comprehensive?
• Would the thesis be understandable and valuable to someone in your field?

Ensure to use this checklist to leave no ground for doubt or missed information in your thesis.

After writing your thesis, the next step is to discuss and defend your findings verbally in front of a knowledgeable panel. You’ve to be well prepared as your professors may grade your presentation abilities.

Preparing your thesis defense

A thesis defense, also known as "defending the thesis," is the culmination of a scholar's research journey. It's the final frontier, where you’ll present their findings and face scrutiny from a panel of experts.

Typically, the defense involves a public presentation where you’ll have to outline your study, followed by a question-and-answer session with a committee of experts. This committee assesses the validity, originality, and significance of the research.

The defense serves as a rite of passage for scholars. It's an opportunity to showcase expertise, address criticisms, and refine arguments. A successful defense not only validates the research but also establishes your authority as a researcher in your field.

Here’s how you can effectively prepare for your thesis defense .

Now, having touched upon the process of defending a thesis, it's worth noting that scholarly work can take various forms, depending on academic and regional practices.

One such form, often paralleled with the thesis, is the 'dissertation.' But what differentiates the two?

Dissertation vs. Thesis

Often used interchangeably in casual discourse, they refer to distinct research projects undertaken at different levels of higher education.

To the uninitiated, understanding their meaning might be elusive. So, let's demystify these terms and delve into their core differences.

Here's a table differentiating between the two.

Wrapping up

From understanding the foundational concept of a thesis to navigating its various components, differentiating it from a dissertation, and recognizing the importance of proper citation — this guide covers it all.

As scholars and readers, understanding these nuances not only aids in academic pursuits but also fosters a deeper appreciation for the relentless quest for knowledge that drives academia.

It’s important to remember that every thesis is a testament to curiosity, dedication, and the indomitable spirit of discovery.

Good luck with your thesis writing!

Frequently Asked Questions

A thesis typically ranges between 40-80 pages, but its length can vary based on the research topic, institution guidelines, and level of study.

A PhD thesis usually spans 200-300 pages, though this can vary based on the discipline, complexity of the research, and institutional requirements.

To identify a thesis topic, consider current trends in your field, gaps in existing literature, personal interests, and discussions with advisors or mentors. Additionally, reviewing related journals and conference proceedings can provide insights into potential areas of exploration.

The conceptual framework is often situated in the literature review or theoretical framework section of a thesis. It helps set the stage by providing the context, defining key concepts, and explaining the relationships between variables.

A thesis statement should be concise, clear, and specific. It should state the main argument or point of your research. Start by pinpointing the central question or issue your research addresses, then condense that into a single statement, ensuring it reflects the essence of your paper.

You might also like

Chat PDF Tools Compared: SciSpace ChatPDF and Sider AI

This ChatGPT Alternative Will Change How You Read PDFs Forever!

Smallpdf vs SciSpace: Which ChatPDF is Right for You?

Explaining Deontic Status by Good Reasoning

• Original Research
• Published: 12 September 2024

Cite this article

• Ulf Hlobil   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5072-9380 1  

This paper offers an account of deontic normativity in terms of attributive goodness. An action is permissible for S in C just in case there is a good practical inference available to S in C that results in S performing (or intending to perform) the action. The standards of goodness for practical inferences are determined by what is a good or bad exercise of the human capacity of practical reason, which is an attributive (and not a deontic) assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

In many respects, this paper is a companion piece to joint work that I did with Katharina Nieswandt (see Hlobil & Nieswandt, 2019 ; Nieswandt & Hlobil 2019 ,   2018 ). I hope that the current paper elucidates aspects of these other papers that some have found difficult to understand. Conversely, reading these other papers, while not at all necessary, may be helpful for a fuller understanding of my motivations and goals in this paper.

I am here setting aside fittingness norms, norms regarding what is good for someone or something, and norms regarding what is good for doing something. I hope that these norms can ultimately be explained in terms of the norms that I am discussing here; however, that is controversial (see Berker, 2022 ; Howard, 2022 ; McHugh & Way 2016 , 2019 ; Thomson 1996 ). I will return to fittingness below.

My position is realist about normativity, but for the distinctions here the anti-realist could understand my fact-talk in a minimalist way.

Berker ( 2022 ) claims that reason-related normative facts do not form a unified category. However, the kind of reason-related normative facts that will matter for my project are facts about having sufficient and decisive reason to do something, which Berker agrees are deontic facts.

I do not claim that the sentence is ambiguous; it is just that a speaker can use it to do different things.

I am here in broad agreement with McPherson’s ( 2018 ) idea that normatively authoritative facts are conceptually tied to the constitutive standards of non-arbitrary selection. However, I understand this kind of selection as a case of practical inference. McPherson sometimes puts his view by saying that the authoritative “ought” settles deliberation. This can be understood in a way that I reject; for I think that the practical inference from “I ought to \(\phi\) ” to doing \(\phi\) can fail to be good.

Together with Katharina Nieswandt, I have argued against this interpretation elsewhere (Hlobil & Nieswandt, 2019 ). Nothing below hangs on whether we are right that this common interpretation is a mis-interpretation.

I think that in all of these cases, their connection to deontic normativity can ultimately be explained by their connection to the attributive goodness of practical reasoning. But this idea need not detain us here.

I have presented an account of inference, which is meant to apply to practical as well as to theoretical inference, in (Hlobil, 2019a , b , 2015 , 2014 ) This account underwrites a version of Boghossian’s ( 2014 ) Taking Condition, but in a way that is neither a doxastic nor an intuitional construal of takings. The details of this account do not matter here.

I disagree on details of each of the cited accounts. Unlike Anscombe ( 2000 , §35). I think that there are practical inferences in which all premises state backward-looking motives, e.g.: “He killed my brother; so, I shall kill him.” Unlike Dancy, I think that practical inference is not best understood as “a process in which we try to work out how to respond to the situation which confronts us” (Dancy, 2018 , 97). For working something out takes time, while individual steps of inferences cannot be interrupted. Unlike Broome ( 2013 ), I do not think that practical inferences that conclude in intentions are primary, unless we include what Anscombe calls an “intention in action.” Nothing in this paper hangs on such details.

If Frege is right that facts are true propositions, some of these premises may also be facts.

The contents of infinitival clauses may or may not be propositions (with unpronounced subject terms).

There is a disagreement about what the bearers of deontic properties are. Geach Geach ( 1982 ) has argued that “ought” should not be understood as applying to propositions because it can happen, e.g., that NN ought to invite MM to dinner while it is not the case that MM ought to be invited to dinner by NN, where the embedded proposition would be the same. If the conclusions of practical inferences are intentions (in action), then my view is compatible with the bearers of deontic properties being the referents of infinitival clauses (which may be act-types, and not propositions).

My formulation here disagrees with the widespread view that normative reasons are always facts. For the premises of a good practical inference might be false. In the terminology of Section 3.2 below, it is common to call only good fact-relative reasons normative reasons. My formulation here can be read to include good belief-relative and good evidence-relative reasons in the class of normative reasons. I think this way of speaking has advantages, but the issue strikes me as mostly terminological.

The English “must” and “ought” differ in meaning, and some hold that taking this into account is important, e.g., to make room for supererogatory acts (Snedegar, 2021 ; Mares & McNamara, 1997 ) For simplicity, I am ignoring such complications here, hoping to take them into account in the future.

In (Nieswandt & Hlobil, 2018 ) we explain in more detail how the qualification that the circumstances must be favorable should be understood. Our explanation there turns on the distinction between de re and de dicto readings of counterfactuals. I do not spell out these details here, and I refer the reader to (Nieswandt & Hlobil, 2018 ).

An opponent might worry that this conflicts with the idea that ought implies can. For, I leave open the possibility that practical inferences conclude in intentions, and one can intend to do something that one cannot do, at least if one does not know that one cannot do it. (Thanks to an anonymous referee for raising this objection.) My answer is that, in the dictum that “ought” implies “can”, abilities must be understood as relative to facts, or evidence, or beliefs, in the same way in which I hold that deontic facts are relative to facts, or evidence, or beliefs, as I will explain below. You are able to do something relative to your beliefs or evidence or the facts iff you doing the action is compatible with what you believe or your evidence or the facts. On my view, a practical inference to an action that you cannot fact-relatively do is not fact-relatively available to you, and similarly for the notions relativized to beliefs and evidence. So, my view does not violate the dictum that “ought” implies “can.” It merely implies that someone can be evidence- or believe-relatively obliged to do something while being fact-relatively unable to do it.

We could go more fine-grained regarding our deontic notions by putting different conditions on conative premises, such that we count inferences as not available if these conditions aren’t met. Perhaps, e.g., conative premises must have objects that are desirable (see Asarnow, 2019 ; Setiya, 2014 ). I don’t spell this out here.

As will become clearer below, I do not claim that permissible action is the aim of practical inference. Indeed, I doubt that practical inference has an independent aim in the same way in which many other acts have aims. However, it suffices for my thesis that aiming at whatever the aim of practical inference may be ensures that the conclusion of a good practical inference is always (an intention for) a permissible action, and that every permissible action could be the result of a good practical inference. This is compatible with the aim of practical inference being richer than permissible action, just as the aim of belief my be richer than truth and still ensure that all and only truths are the possible objects of correct belief.

Philosophers who want to explain reasons in terms of—evidence for (Kearns & Star, 2009 ) or explanations of (Broome, 2004 )—what we ought to do may have difficulties accepting this claim. If so, I take this to speak against these views. However, I cannot engage the issue here.

For example, Logins ( 2019 ) thinks that the fact that the building is on fire and I don’t believe so is a reason for me to investigate whether the building is on fire. Others think that the fact that there is a surprise party waiting at home for you is a reason to go there, while you cannot reason from this fact to the response of going home without thereby ruining the surprise and hence the reason for going home. I think that all these objections can be answered (see Kietzmann, 2023 ). In particular, I think these objections usually turn on the unquestioned assumption that reasons for an action are considerations that count in favor of the action. Advocates of the reasoning view should not accept this claim in an unqualified way.

Brunero ( 2022 ) has presented a challenge to this, which I leave for another occasion.

The idea of taking the capacity to be central has similarities with Schellenberg’s ( 2018 ) work on perception. However, a key advantage of Schellenberg’s view is that the exercise of a capacity is something that hallucinations and perceptions can have in common. There is nothing analogous in my case.

A similar idea can be found in Thomson ( 1996 , 138): “a K’s being good to look at consists in its being such as to please, by its looks, those who are experts in Ks, and a K’s tasting good consists in its being such as to please, by its taste, those who are experts in Ks, and so on.”

The term “response-dependent concept” was introduced by Johnston ( 1989 , 145) for concepts such that what it is for an object to fall under the concept is for subjects to be disposed to produce a particular response to the object. Such concepts express response-dependent properties. There is a broad class of theories according to which aesthetic value is a response-dependent property, a example of which is (Gorodeisky, 2021 ). For an overview see (King, 2023 ); and see (Watkins & Shelley, 2012 ) for opposition.

For a general worry about fittingness-based views see (Achs & Na’aman, 2023 ).

Advocates of fittingness have offered various ways to make the notion of fittingness clear and non-mysterious (see Berker, 2022 ; Howard & Rowland, 2022 ). Without having space to engage the issue, I can merely say that such efforts often appeal to occurrences of the English suffixes “-ible” and “-able”, and such appeals do not work well in many other languages (including my first language).

This is aversion of the approach to nonmonotonic consequence familiar from preferential logics (Kraut et al., 1990 ). See my (Hlobil, 2018 ) for a discussion of some limitations of this approach.

An anonymous referee objects that McHugh and Way would not allow arbitrary stipulations of normality-orderings and make substantive claims about these orderings. However, I fail to see why this should matter here. My point is that according to their account, choosing an appropriate normality ordering, we can make any practical inference come out good or bad, as we wish. Perhaps McHugh and Way want to rule out the normality ordering that we would need in a particular case. But in this case, it is not their idea that good inferences preserve fittingness that ensure that a given inference is good or bad. Rather, it is their rejection of a particular normality ordering as illegitimate that ensure the result. My point is not that McHugh and Way allow arbitrary normality orderings; my point is that what does the real work in their theory are constraints on normality orderings. Because of that (FV3) is not really the rival theory to my account that it might seem to be.

Thanks to an anonymous referee for helping me with this point.

Velleman puts his argument for this idea as follows: “Any enterprise that has a formal object must have a substantive object as well—that is, a goal that is not stated solely in terms that depend on the concept of being the object of the enterprise. [...] A game whose object was specifiable only as ‘winning’ wouldn’t have an object—that is, wouldn’t have any object in particular. And if a game had no particular object, then there would be no such thing as winning it, and so it wouldn’t be a fully constituted competitive game. Similarly, a hunt whose object was specifiable only as ‘the quarry’ wouldn’t be a fully constituted search, and the question ‘What is the answer?’ isn’t by itself a fully constituted question” (Velleman, 1996 , 701).

It seems to me that acts for which Velleman and Silverstein are correct and acts for which they are not is closely related to Aristotle’s distinction between production ( poesis ) and acting ( praxis ). However, this is merely a hypothesis and beyond the scope of this paper.

Achs, R., & Na’aman, O. (2023). The subtleties of fit: Reassessing the fit-value biconditionals. Philosophical Studies, 1 , 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-023-01972-0

Article   Google Scholar  

Anscombe, G. E. M. (2000). Intention (2nd ed.). Harvard University Press.

Google Scholar  

Anscombe, G.E.M. (2005). Practical inference. M. Geach and L. Gormally (Eds.), Human life, action and ethics: Essays by G.E.M. Anscombe (pp.109-147). Exeter: Imprint Academic.

Asarnow, S. (2017). The reasoning view and defeasible practical reasoning. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 95 (3), 614–636.

Asarnow, S. (2019). Internal reasons and the boy who cried wolf. Ethics, 130 (1), 32–58. https://doi.org/10.1086/704342

Berker, S. (2022). The deontic, the evaluative, and the fitting. C. Howard and R.A. Rowland (Eds.), Fittingness: Essays in the philosophy of normativity (pp. 23–57). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Boghossian, P. A. (2014). What is inference? Philosophical Studies, 169 (1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-012-9903-x

Broome, J. (2004). Reasons. R.J. Wallace, P. Pettit, S. Scheffler, and M. Smith (Eds.), Reason and value: Themes from the moral philosophy of Joseph Raz (pp. 28—55). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Broome, J. (2013). Rationality through reasoning . Wiley-Blackwell.

Book   Google Scholar  

Brunero, J. (2022). Reasons and defeasible reasoning. Philosophical Quarterly, 72 (1), 41–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/pq/pqab013

Dancy, J. (2000). Practical reality . Oxford University Press.

Dancy, J. (2018). Practical shape: A theory of practical reasoning . Oxford University Press.

Enoch, D. (2017). Non-naturalistic realism in metaethics. In T. McPherson and D. Plunkett (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Metaethics (pp. 29-42). New York: Routledge.

Ewing, A. C. (1947). The definition of good . Macmillan Routledge.

Fogal, D., & Worsnip, A. (2021). Which reasons which rationality? Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 8.   https://doi.org/10.3998/ergo.1148

Foot, P. (2001). Natural goodness . Oxford University Press.

Geach, P. (1982). Whatever happened to deontic logic? Philosophia, 11 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02378802

Gorodeisky, K. (2021). The authority of pleasure. Noûs, 55 (1), 199–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12310

Gregory, A. (2014). A very good reason to reject the buck-passing account. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 92 (2), 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2013.813055

Gregory, A. (2016). Normative reasons as good bases. Philosophical Studies, 173 (9), 2291–2310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-015-0609-8

Hanser, M. (2005). Permissibility and practical inference. Ethics, 115 (3), 443–470.

Hlobil, U. (2014). Against Boghossian, Wright and Broome on inference. Philosophical Studies, 167 (2), 419–429.

Hlobil, U. (2015). What is inference (PhD dissertation) . "PHD DISSERTATION" NOT IN ITALICS University of Pittsburgh.

Hlobil, U. (2018). Choosing your nonmonotonic logic: A shopper’s guide. P. Arazim and T. Lavicka (Eds.), The logica yearbook 2017 (pp. 109–123). London: College Publications.

Hlobil, U. (2019). Goodness-fixing isn’t good enough: A reply to Mchugh and Way. Mind, 128 (512), 1309–1318. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzy035

Hlobil, U. (2019). Inferring by attaching force. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 97 (4), 701–714. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2018.1564060

Hlobil, U., & Brandom, R.B. (2024). Reasons for logic, logic for reasons: Pragmatics, semantics, and conceptual roles . New York: Routledge.

Hlobil, U., & Nieswandt, K. (2019). Foot without Achilles’ heel. Philosophia, 47 (5), 1501–1515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-019-00062-y

Howard, C. (2019). The fundamentality of fit. IN  Oxford Studies in Metaethics, 14 , 216–236. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198841449.003.0010

Howard, C., & Rowland, R.A. (2022). Fittingness: A user’s guide. IN C. Howard and R.A. Rowland (Eds.), Fittingness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Johnston, M. (1989). Dispositional theories of value. Aristotelian Society Supplementary, 63 (1), 139–174. https://doi.org/10.1093/aristoteliansupp/63.1.89

Kearns, S., & Star, D. (2009). Reasons as evidence. Oxford Studies in Metaethics, 4 , 215–242.

Kietzmann, C. (2023). Why reasons and reasoning don’t come apart. Synthese, 202 (5), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04355-4

King, A. (2023). Response-dependence and aesthetic theory. IN C. Howard and R.A. Rowland (Eds.), Fittingness (pp. 309–326). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kraut, S., Lehmann, D., & Magidor, M. (1990). Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence, 44 , 167–207.

Logins, A. (2019). Normative reasons without (good) reasoning. Ethics, 130 (2), 208–210. https://doi.org/10.1086/705765

Mares, E. D., & McNamara, P. (1997). Supererogation in deontic logic: Metatheory for DWE and some close neighbours. Studia Logica, 59 (3), 397–415. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005040513277

McDowell, J. (2010). What is the content of an intention in action? Ratio, 23 (4), 415–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9329.2010.00476.x

McHugh, C. (2012). The truth norm of belief. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 93 (1), 8–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2011.01413.x

McHugh, C., & Way, J. (2016). Fittingness first. Ethics, 126 (3), 575–606. https://doi.org/10.1086/684712

McHugh, C., & Way, J. (2018). What is good reasoning? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research . https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12299

McHugh, C., & Way, J. (2022). Getting things right: Fittingness, reasons, and value . Oxford University Press.

McPherson, T. (2018). Authoritatively normative concepts. Oxford Studies in Metaethics, 13 , 253–277. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198823841.003.0012

McPherson, T., & Plunkett, D. (2024). The fragmentation of authoritative normativity. IN R. Shafer-Landau (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaethics, vol. 19. Oxford University Press.

Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia ethica . Dover Publications.

Müller, A. W. (2004). Acting well. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 54 , 15–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1358246100008432

Nieswandt, K., & Hlobil, U. (2018). Virtues for the imperfect. Journal of Value Inquiry, 53 (4), 605–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-018-9676-3

Nieswandt, K., & Hlobil, U. (2019). Do the virtues make you happy? Philosophical Inquiries, 7 (2), 181–202.  https://doi.org/10.4454/philinq.v7i2.235

Parfit, D. (2011). On what matters: Two-volume set . Oxford University Press.

Scanlon, T. M. (2014). Being realistic about reasons . Oxford University Press.

Schellenberg, S. (2018). The unity of perception: Content, consciousness, evidence . Oxford University Press.

Schmidt, E. (2021). Where reasons and reasoning come apart. Noûs, 55 (4), 762–781. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12329

Schroeder, M. (2021). Reasons first . Oxford University Press.

Setiya, K. (2007). Rationalism without reasons . Princeton University Press.

Setiya, K. (2014). What is a reason to act? Philosophical Studies, 167 (2), 221–235.

Silverstein, M. (2016). Reducing reasons. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 10 (1), 1–22.

Silverstein, M. (2017). Ethics and practical reasoning. Ethics, 127 (2), 353–382.

Snedegar, J. (2021). Reasons, competition, and latitude. IN R. Shafer-Landau (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaethics, volume 16 (pp. 134–156). Oxford University Press.

Thomson, J.J. (1996). Evaluatives and directives. IN G. Harman and J.J. Thomson (Eds.), Moral relativism and moral. objectivity (pp. 125–154). Oxford: Blackwell.

Thomson, J. J. (1997). The right and the good. Journal of Philosophy, 94 (6), 273. https://doi.org/10.2307/2564542

Thomson, J. J. (2008). Normativity . Open Court.

Velleman, J. D. (1996). The possibility of practical reason. Ethics, 106 (4), 694–726. https://doi.org/10.1086/233669

Watkins, M., & Shelley, J. (2012). Response-dependence about aesthetic value. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 93 (3), 338–352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2012.01429.x

Way, J. (2017). Reasons as premises of good reasoning. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly . https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12135

Williams, B. (1979). Internal and external reasons. IN R. Harrison (Ed.), Rational action (pp. 101–113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wodak, D. (2019). Mere formalities: Fictional normativity and normative authority. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 49 (6), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2018.1433795

Wodak, D. (2019). An objectivist’s guide to subjective reasons. Res Philosophica, 96 (2), 229–244. https://doi.org/10.11612/resphil.1750

Zimmerman, M. J. (2001). The nature of intrinsic value . Rowman & Littlefield.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I want to thank two anonymous referees, Christopher Howard, Katharina Nieswandt, David Hunter, and the audience at the 2020 Concordia Research Symposium in Philosophy (CRSP) for invaluable discussion and comments on earlier versions of some of this material. I also thank Stephanie Leary and Christopher Howard for letting me present a version of this material in their research seminar at McGill University in 2021; and I thank the participants for their very helpful feedback.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Philosophy, Concordia University, 1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd. W., Montreal, QC, H3G 1M8, Canada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulf Hlobil .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The author declares that there is no Conflict Conflict not with capital of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Hlobil, U. Explaining Deontic Status by Good Reasoning. Erkenn (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-024-00860-1

Download citation

Received : 24 May 2023

Accepted : 14 August 2024

Published : 12 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-024-00860-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research