After reading “Argument as a Conversation: The Role of Inquiry in Writing a Researched Argument” by Stuart Greene, my eyes were opened to an entirely new way of viewing the process of research. I know, how cliché right? But really, his way of comparing research to simple, everyday conversation really gave me some insight as how I’d like to go about framing my next research paper.
Greene claims that argument is “part of what we do every day: we confront a public issue, thinking something that is open o dispute, and we take a stand and support what we think and feel with what we believe are good reasons.”
He then goes on to explain that making an argument entails providing good reasons to support your viewpoint, as well as counterarguments and recognizing how and why readers might object to your ideas. Greene claims that all of this supports the idea that inquiry, research, and writing arguments are intimately related.
So basically, I’ve been way over thinking and blowing my adrenals out trying to structure and format my research papers… when I could just be framing them as if I were having a respectful, educated conversation. This rigid and strict process of research that has been taught to students doesn’t need to be so rigid at all. Of course research papers need to be supported with data and facts from reputable sources, but this doesn’t mean they can’t include extremely controversial standpoints and/or topics of major discussion. So why not throw in that counterargument? Maybe because you think it will weaken your topic? That’s always been my greatest fear. But this new approach to research as a conversation leaves space for challenging views, and a chance for the author to leave it open to discussion or politely disagree and explain why.
Basically, I love this take on research and I plan to use it in not only my thought process, but applying it to future projects.
-FH