Or "introduction", "theory" and "conclusion")
It consists of three large pieces. "Ask questions.
That is, the central argument should be clearly put forward at the beginning of an argumentative paper, "analyzing the problem" means analyzing and demonstrating around the central argument in the middle of the article, and "solving the problem" means drawing a comprehensive conclusion at the end of the article.
Or raise forward-looking hopes. Everyone knows this, and I won't repeat it here.
The second is to analyze the problem, that is, the part of this theory, which should be discussed in layers according to a certain dimension. The so-called "dimension" is the direction of discussion. There are four "dimensions":
What it is, why, how and what it is. In general,
A middle school student's argumentative writing can be developed as long as he chooses one or two of these four dimensions. But no matter which direction you look,
There must be some connection between their arguments. Generally speaking, there are three types: parallel type, progressive type and contrast type.
The so-called juxtaposition is to list several arguments from the same direction around the center and demonstrate them one by one. If you only write around one dimension, then the relationship between several sub-arguments is mostly parallel.
. Compared with the parallel structure, the progressive structure is the same except for the different meaning connection between arguments, so I won't talk about it any more.
The so-called contrast is to start from the positive and negative aspects of the topic, make positive and negative comparative arguments, and draw a conclusion. Its advantages are simple structure, sufficient demonstration and convenient use. The simplest contrast is that after putting forward the viewpoint, one section demonstrates the viewpoint from the positive side, the other section demonstrates the viewpoint from the negative side, and finally draws a conclusion. Another comparative structure is to discuss or put forward arguments from the front, and then discuss them from the opposite side through turning points or assumptions.