Argument vs. Argument: A Comparison Between Two Seemingly Identical Books
A Critical Writing Text Review by Christopher Toney | October 15, 2007 | All Rights Reserved
At first glance, it would appear that The Structure of Argument by Annette Rottenberg and Donna Winchell is almost identical to the book Critical Thinking,
Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument by Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau. However, upon further review and analysis, it is apparent that although these books originate from the same publisher and cover similar topic areas, they are in fact quite different from each other. By comparing and contrasting the content, organization, explanations, readings, examples, graphics, and layout of these books, it will be apparent that these books are quite different from one another.
In order to differentiate The Structure of Argument from A Brief Guide to Argument, I will first consider the content and organization of each book. A Brief Guide to Argument covers a broad range of aspects of argument. For example, it focuses on three major categories to cover argument: Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing. The preface of the book states that “this book is a text about critical thinking and argumentation—a book about getting ideas, using sources, evaluating kinds of evidence” (iii). It is obvious from this statement that this book is not just about argument—there is more to be covered in it. Part one focuses on teaching the reader to understand how to think and read critically as a standing ground for teaching about the methods of argument. It assumes that before one can fully understand argument, one must first understand how to read and think critically. The second part of the book focuses on teaching how to write critically; it covers aspects from analyzing written arguments to forming arguments on one’s own by utilizing sources. The third part focuses on expanding views of argument. It considers a philosopher’s view, a logician’s view, a moralist’s view, a lawyer’s view, a psychologist’s view, a literary critic’s view, and finally, a forensic view on argumentation. Part four, the final part of the book, focuses on “the state of the individual” (xxi). It appears that the content of the book builds in emphatic order—the most important topics are covered last. It assumes that to advance to the next chapter and the next part of the book, the reader must hold an understanding of the previous chapters and previous parts of the book.
I will now focus on the content and organization of The Structure of Argument to show how it differs from A Brief Guide to Argument. The preface of The Structure of Argument states that “In this text we have adapted—and greatly simplified—some of Toulmin’s concepts and terminology for first-year students. We have also introduced two elements of argument with which Toulmin is not directly concerned….We have also stressed the significance of audience as a practical matter” (iv). The Structure of Argument is primarily focused in presenting argument. It divides its content into two main parts: The Structure of Argument and Writing, Researching, and Presenting Arguments. The book does a great job describing its organization and content: “In Part One, after two introductory chapters, a chapter each is devoted to the chief elements of argument—the definitions that lay a foundation for shared understanding, the claims that students make in their arguments, the support they must supply for their claims, and the warrants that underlie their arguments” (iv-v). The last two chapters from Part One focus on logical fallacies and “the power of word choice in arguing effectively” (v). Part Two is comprised of three chapters that cover “the process of writing, researching, and presenting arguments [orally]” (v). So while A Brief Guide to Argument covers critical thinking, reading, and writing separately (as it pertains to argument), The Structure of Argument only focuses on introducing and teaching aspects of argument in specific. The Structure of Argument, rather than building in emphatic order in its organization, integrates its content to provide the background necessary to teach argument. For example, A Brief Guide to Argument devotes two chapters on teaching how to read critically, while The Structure of Argument uses sample readings at the end of each chapter to integrate critical reading and understanding into its content. It is also important to note that these two offer different ranges of material in relation to argument. For example, The Structure of Argument offers material dealing with oral presentation of arguments and also presents the common fallacies in argument; A Brief Guide to Argument does not cover oral presentation and doesn’t devote a chapter to fallacies. Further, A Brief Guide to Argument offers two parts devoted to expanding aspects of argument to enhance understanding of argument in various contexts (for example, a psychologist’s perspective, a lawyer’s perspective, etc.); The Structure of Argument does not go this far.
To further expound my argument, I will next consider the explanations and readings in each of the books to show how they differ from one another in this aspect. In The Structure of Argument, Rottenberg and Winchell use a preponderance of textual explanations in making their points. For example, in a given chapter, the authors divide the material into sub-sections. In the first chapter (“Understanding Argument”), for instance, the sub-sections consist of “The Nature of Argument, [Why Argument is Studied], [The Importance of Written Argument], The Terms of Argument, and The Audience” (3-12). I will now look at the sub-section focusing on “The Audience.” Rottenberg and Winchell use a tone that is inviting and knowledgeable, fostering a mood that encourages learning. When defining and talking about the importance of audience, Rottenberg and Winchell write that “in such cases the writer asks some or all of the following questions about the audience: Why has this audience requested this report? What do they want to get out of it? How much do they already know about the subject?...” (13). This easy to follow explanation makes it fairly easy for the reader to follow along with the processes required to acquire an adequate understanding of not only the sub-topic (“The Audience”), but how it relates to the overall subject in the chapter (“Understanding Argument”). There are also readings at the end of each chapter that relate to the overall topic in the chapter. There are about five readings per chapter that range from popular historical essays such as The Declaration of Independence to A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift (a popular satirical essay). In most cases, the essays are analyzed in terms of what is covered in the corresponding chapter; this is usually followed by discussion questions. For example, the text breaks down the Declaration of Independence into definition, claim, support, warrant, logic, and language—all aspects covered in the chapter. Breaking down essays into components covered in the chapter makes it easier to apply the knowledge gained in the chapter to real-life situations. The text is not limited to textual explanations and readings; Rottenberg and Winchell note that they “have provided examples, readings, discussion questions, and writing suggestions that are, [they] hope, both practical and stimulating” (v). I will further discuss this in detail in the next couple of paragraphs.
I will now draw my attention to the explanations and readings in A Brief Guide to Argument to show how it differs from The Structure of Argument. Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau also rely on textual explanations to make a point (as all texts do). Like in The Structure of Argument, Barnet and Bedau also sub-divide each chapter into sub-sections. The explanations are usually followed by textual and visual examples. For example, the first chapter, dealing with “Critical Thinking,” has a sub-division called “Thinking About Driver’s Licenses and Photographic Identifications” (3). It is accompanied by a textual explanation followed by a cartoon. In analyzing this cartoon, Barnet and Bedau write, “Well, let’s think about this—let’s think critically, and to do this, we will use a simple aid that is equal to the best word processor, a pencil” (4). This textual and visual explanation make it easy to understand the material; further, the tone that is established by the authors makes the reading seem as if the authors are actively interacting with the reader (as in “let us think about this”), creating an inviting atmosphere to learn in. Also, it appears that the material is easy to grasp (as in “and to do this…we will use a simple aid…a pencil). However, the chapter’s sub-sections are not as clear-cut as those in The Structure of Argument (“Thinking About Driver’s Licenses and Photographic Identifications” versus “The Audience”), which could make it more difficult to follow the organization and explanations of the material. There are about five readings per chapter that pertain to the chapter’s subject material like those in The Structure of Argument; these essays cover controversial issues like those in The Structure of Argument. Barnet and Bedau write that “eighteen of the readings (about one-third of the total) are new, as are a dozen topics such as the sale of human organs, drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Title IX (concerning women’s sports in college), and the use of handheld cell phones in automobiles” (vii). In fact, both books contain the same essay “A Proposal to Abolish Grading” by Paul Goodman. While The Structure of Argument contains several analysis paragraphs analyzing sample essays (which is followed by discussion questions), A Brief Guide to Argument does not contain analysis paragraphs following the sample essays. Instead, it only includes discussion and synthesis questions at the end of the reading. This could make it more difficult for a reader to analyze the essay since there is no model to follow.
I will next consider the examples, graphics, and layout present in The Structure of Argument and A Brief Guide to Argument to expand my argument. In The Structure of Argument, Winchell and Rottenberg write that “The examples include essays, articles, speeches, news reports, editorial opinions, letters to the editor, excerpts from online sources, cartoons, and advertisements. They reflect the liveliness and complexity of argumentation that exercises with no realistic context often suppress” (v). There seems to be a preponderance of advertisement and online sourced graphics (from the General Motors ad on p. 213 to the graph of “Plastic That Goes to Waste” on p.164). In most cases, graphics are used as examples. For example, the book uses a smoking ad with the phrase “the more you smoke the more cool gear you’ll earn” (91). It uses the content of “definition” in chapter three to analyze the ad, saying that “the success of this advertisement depends largely on its play on the world cool” (91). This method of comparing visual graphics with textual material is a practical way of getting the reader to understand the author’s point. The overall layout is divided into two main sections as discussed above: The Structure of Argument (chapters 1-8) and Writing, Researching, and Presenting Arguments (chapters 9-11). The layout for each chapter focuses on sub-sections of the chapter. Each sub-section consists of a textual definition and discussion of terms, followed by textual and visual and graphical examples. Essays at the end of the chapter are followed by discussion questions, assignment options, and online web-links detailing places to find more information about the chapter.
I will now focus on the examples, graphics, and layout in A Brief Guide to Argument to differentiate it from The Structure of Argument. Like the other text, this A Brief Guide to Argument also relies on graphics to be used as examples. Barnet and Bedau write about the visual graphics that accompany the chapter: “advertisements, photographs, and visual aids to clarify (bar graphs, tables, pie charts)” (vii). These are similar to those in The Structure of Argument; they range from a cartoon about logic (on p. 74) to a photograph of Martin Luther King Junior delivering a speech (on p. 146) to an ad from the American Cancer Society against smoking (on p. 155). When scanning through the book, it appears that there is a preponderance of cartoons and advertisements (where The Structure of Argument contained mainly advertisements and online graphics, such as charts and graphs). As mentioned earlier, there are also textual examples and essays that also serve as examples to support the subject material. The layout is the same as The Structure of Argument except for the fact that it is divided into four parts (mentioned above); furthermore, the end of the chapter does not contain assignment options and online web-links detailing where to find more information about the chapter like the other text does—instead, the chapter ends with discussion questions following the last essay of the chapter.
At a glance, The Structure of Argument and A Brief Guide to Argument appear to be identical not only in their layout, but in their content. It is necessary to break each book into smaller parts in order to analyze how they differ—this enables the reader to see where each one has strengths and weaknesses; it is also possible to see how one book stacks up to the other. By comparing and contrasting the content, organization, explanations, readings, examples, graphics, and layout of these books, it is apparent that these books are quite different from one another. Without this deeper analysis, these two books may be overlooked as being similar—however, I have proven that they each differ in their own aspects.
Works Cited
Barnet, Sylvan, and Hugo Bedau. Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2005.
Rottenberg, Annette T., and Donna H. Winchell. The Structure of Argument. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2006.
