Skip to Main Content

Academic Writing: Building an argument

Building an Argument

What is an argument?

An argument is a reason or set of reasons which support an action, idea, or theory. Good arguments are clear, convincing, and well-supported with evidence. The logical thread of the argument can be clearly followed, and it is well-balanced by taking account of opposing views and challenging them where reasonable. Weak arguments are unsupported, unclear, subjective, and unconvincing.


The importance of arguments in academic scholarship

The ability to build robust arguments is an important skill to achieve success in HE studies. Markers of assessed work will want to see that you have followed a process of reasoning to develop a viewpoint and reach a sound conclusion. You may have your own ideas and opinions, but these must be persuasive and supported by convincing evidence. The ability to develop compelling arguments enables you to engage with wider academic scholarship, interrogate concepts and theories, challenge established policies and practices, and propose new ideas with conviction. 


When do you need to build an argument in academic work?

Establishing an argument is a form of critical thinking and writing. Not all academic writing requires you to build an argument. You will need to carefully consider the assignment question and its language to determine if you need to build a strong, convincing argument.

Here are some points to consider about your assignment task to decide if argumentation is needed:

  • Assignments which ask you to ‘describe’ or ‘define’ are not generally argumentative in nature. 
  • Most assignments which require critical writing in some form will need a degree of argumentation to make well-evidenced points. However, you may not need to state a strong position which you argue throughout the work. These assignments will be more exploratory and balanced and might include words such as ‘explore’, ‘examine’, or ‘discuss’. 
  • Assignments that require a more assertive, persuasive argumentative approach will expect you to state a position and convince the reader why they should agree with you. You will need to show a line of reasoned argument leading to a conclusion that re-states your position as a response to the task. These assignments may ask you to 'critically evaluate’, ‘justify’, or ask ‘to what extent’ something might be true. They may ask you what you think, which requires you to go further than providing an unsupported opinion.

Things to consider

Elements of an argument

The main elements of an argument are:

  1. Position: The statement or viewpoint that you want the audience to accept. This may or may not be stated from the outset.
  2. Support: Evidence given to support/justify your position and prove your point.
  3. Proof: The position reached based on evidence in favour of the argument
  4. Counter arguments: Potential objections or alternative viewpoints that must be considered
  5. Responses: Engaging with objections to balance the argument.
  6. Line of Argument: The logical sequencing of the reasons why, on balance, this viewpoint is justifiable and preferable.
  7. Conclusion: A final, and freshly worded, summation and clarification of your proven position.
     
Types of evidence to support arguments

Evidence used to support arguments can take different forms, and acceptable evidence will vary from one discipline to another. Types of evidence include:

  • Carefully selected, authoritative literature (well-regarded studies by respected scholars in the field) - ideally use more than one source as this shows a weight of evidence, and note that you may need to critically analyse the source and its contribution to the debate
  • Quotations by authoritative individuals or organisations (properly referenced)
  • Data (qualitative, quantitative, empirical, statistics)
  • Archival or documentary evidence
  • Visual records (for example, photographic evidence)
  • Personal experience and observations (not always acceptable, but central to reflective pieces of work) 

Note that you do not need to evidence everything. You do not need to evidence generally accepted facts (common knowledge). You may not need to evidence generally accepted knowledge in your specialist field, although this will vary with your level of study. At the early stages of your studies, you may need to evidence your understanding of the fundamental knowledge of your specialism. 

One way of thinking about whether to evidence a point is to imagine the reader asking, ‘How do you know that?’. The answer could be that you have read it from a trustworthy source, or you have based it on published data, or it is from your own original research, for example. 
 

Using evidence to support arguments in your writing

Sometimes it will be enough to put a reference at the end of a sentence as evidence to support a point, but usually presenting evidence alone is not sufficient to be taken as proof. The evidence rarely speaks for itself, and you should not make the reader do the work. You will need to convince the reader of the connection of the evidence to your standpoint and demonstrate how and why it informs your thinking. 
You may need to:

  • Synthesise more than one source of evidence, showing connections such as similarities, contradictions, limitations, or expansion of ideas, and explain how these inform your thinking.
  • Set out your interpretation of the evidence and explain this (consider if there may be other possible interpretations). 
  • Set out the extent to which the evidence supports your arguments and any limitations, weaknesses, or gaps (does the evidence allow you to draw generalised conclusions, or might it only apply in certain circumstances?).
  • Explain the relevance and significance of the evidence to your argument (respond to the ‘So what?’ question). 
  • Acknowledge conflicting evidence, engage with it honestly and explain the implications for your own argument.
     
Barriers to Effective Arguments
It is important to be mindful of barriers that might impact the quality of your argument. These can include the following:
  • Confirmation bias (‘echo-chamber’ effect, only seeing evidence that reinforces your own viewpoint)
  • Reluctance to criticise experts
  • Mistakenly thinking that being ‘critical’ means focusing on solely the negative, without crediting positive contributions
  • A closed mind or unchallenged assumptions
  • Lack of research and being poorly informed
  • Being inconsistent or illogical
  • Triviality, superficiality, and vagueness

Further Reading