Claims of Policy

The most familiar kind of argument demands action. It is easy to see when the writer is asking readers to do something. Here are a few phrases that signal a claim of policy, a claim that is pushing readers to do something:

• We should _____________.
• We ought to _____________.
• We must _____________.
• Let’s _____________.
• The best course is _____________.
• The solution is to _____________.
• The next step should be _____________.
• We should consider _____________.
• Further research should be done to determine _____________.

Here are a few sample claims of policy:

• Landlords should not be allowed to raise the rent more than 2% per year.
• The federal government should require a background check before allowing anyone to buy a gun.
• Social media accounts should not be censored in any way.

A claim of policy can also look like a direct command, such as “So if you are an American citizen, don’t let anything stop you from voting.”

Note that not all claims of policy give details or specifics about what should be done or how. Sometimes an author is only trying to build momentum and point us in a certain direction. For example, “Schools must find a way to make bathrooms more private for everyone, not just transgender people.”

Claims of policy don’t have to be about dramatic actions. Even discussion, research, and writing are kinds of action. For example, “Americans need to learn more about other wealthy nations’ health care systems in order to see how much better things could be in America.”

Claims of Fact

Arguments do not always point toward action. Sometimes writers want us to share their vision of reality on a particular subject. They may want to paint a picture of how something happened, describe a trend, or convince us that something is bad or good.

In some cases, the writer may want to share a particular vision of what something is like, what effects something has, how something is changing, or of how something unfolded in the past. The argument might define a phenomenon, a trend, or a period of history.

Often these claims are simply presented as fact, and an uncritical reader may not see them as arguments at all. However, very often claims of fact are more controversial than they seem. For example, consider the claim, “Caffeine boosts performance.” Does it really? How much? How do we know? Performance at what kind of task? For everyone? Doesn’t it also have downsides? A writer could spend a book convincing us that caffeine really boosts performance and explaining exactly what they mean by those three words.

Some phrases writers might use to introduce a claim of fact include the following:

• Research suggests that _____________.
• The data indicate that _____________.
• _____________is increasing or decreasing.
• There is a trend toward _____________.
• _____________causes _____________
• _____________leads to _____________.

Often a claim of fact will be the basis for other claims about what we should do that look more like what we associate with the word “argument.” However, many pieces of writing in websites, magazines, office settings, and academic settings don’t try to move people toward action. They aim primarily at getting readers to agree with their view of what is fact. For example, it took many years of argument, research, and public messaging before most people accepted the claim that “Smoking causes cancer.”

Here are a few arguable sample claims of fact:

• It is easier to grow up biracial in Hawaii than in any other part of the United States.
• Raising the minimum wage will force many small businesses to lay off workers.
• Fires in the western United States have gotten worse primarily because of climate change.
• Antidepressants provide the most benefit when combined with talk therapy.

Claims of Value

In other cases, the writer is not just trying to convince us that something is a certain way or causes something, but is trying to say how good or bad that thing is. They are rating it, trying to get us to share her assessment of its value. Think of a movie or book review or an Amazon or Yelp review. Even a “like” on Facebook or a thumbs up on a text message is a claim of value.

Claims of value are fairly easy to identify. Some phrases that indicate a claim of value include the following:

• _____________is terrible/disappointing/underwhelming.
• _____________is mediocre/average/decent/acceptable.
• We should celebrate _____________.
• _____________is great, wonderful, fantastic, impressive, makes a substantial contribution to _____________.

A claim of value can also make a comparison. It might assert that something is better than, worse than, or equal to something else. Some phrases that signal a comparative claim of value include these:

• _____________is the best _____________.
• _____________is the worst _____________.
• _____________is better than _____________.
• _____________is worse than _____________.
• _____________is just as good as _____________.
• _____________is just as bad as _____________

The following are examples of claims of value:

• The Bay Area is the best place to start a biotech career.
• Forest fires are becoming the worst threat to public health in California.
• Human rights are more important than border security.
• Experimenting with drag is the best way I’ve found to explore my feelings about masculinity and femininity.
• It was so rude when that lady asked you what race you are.

Note that the above arguments all include claims of fact but go beyond observing to praise or criticize what they are observing.

Exercises

On a social media site like Facebook or Twitter or on your favorite news site, find an example of one of each kind of claim.

Making Notes on the Writer’s Claims

A first step toward summarizing and responding to an argument is to first make margin notes on the claims. Let’s take the following argument as an example:

Sample Argument: “Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?”

All the disagreement over immigration policy I have been hearing about in the news lately reminds me that while I believe in the rule of law, I feel profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of keeping people out who are desperate to come in. Is illegal immigration actually wrong? Is it unethical to cross a border without permission?

I don’t have a clear vision yet of what the right border policy would be, and I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk. But surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions.

If I were raising children in an impoverished third-world community plagued by violence, and if I had a chance to get my family to the U.S., I would take it. I would try to cross a border illegally so my children would get enough to eat and would have a more stable childhood and a chance at a better education and a better career. What parent would sit on their hands and tell themself, “I want to give my child a better life, but oh well. If I don’t have the papers, I guess it would be wrong”?

If most of us, under desperate circumstances, would cross the border without permission and feel no moral qualms about doing so, then we must recognize this crossing as an ethical, reasonable act. If it is ethical and reasonable, then how can either a wall or a detention center be on the side of justice? We must find a policy that treats migrants as we would want to be treated–with empathy, respect, and offers of help.

 

We can often paraphrase the claims more readily on a second read when we are already familiar with the content. Some need the physicality of taking notes by hand in the margins of a book or a printout. Some take notes by creating comments in Word or Google Docs. Others use online annotation systems like Hypothes.is. Another way is to copy the text into a table in a word processing program and write notes in a second column, as we have done below:

Sample Margin Notes on an Argument’s Claims

Section of the text	Notes on the claims
Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?	Implies a claim of fact: we would all cross the border (under what circumstances?)
All the disagreement over immigration policy I have been hearing about in the news lately reminds me that while I believe in the rule of law, I feel profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of keeping people out who are desperate to come in. Is illegal immigration actually wrong? Is it unethical to cross a border without permission?	Suggests a claim of value: It might not be wrong to cross illegally. But also suggests another claim of value: that “the rule of law” is right. Is this a contradiction?
I don’t have a clear vision yet of what the right border policy would be, and I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk. But surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions.	Claim of policy about the border–we shouldn’t criminalize people who have legitimate reasons to cross. Admits there are security risks in “open borders.” Looking for some kind of middle ground that keeps us safe but doesn’t criminalize migrants.
If I were raising children in an impoverished third-world community plagued by violence, and if I had a chance to get my family to the U.S., I would take it. I would try to cross a border illegally so my children would get enough to eat and would have a more stable childhood and a chance at a better education and a better career. What parent would sit on their hands and tell themself, “I want to give my child a better life, but oh well. If I don’t have the papers, I guess it would be wrong”?	Claim of fact: the author would consider it right to cross illegally to benefit their children. That is, if their whole family didn’t have enough money, a safe place to live, or access to a good education. They imply another claim of fact: that any parent would do the same and feel okay about it.
If most of us, under desperate circumstances, would cross the border without permission and feel no moral qualms about doing so, then we must recognize this crossing as an ethical, reasonable act. If it is ethical and reasonable, then how can either a wall or a detention center be on the side of justice? We must find a policy that treats migrants as we would want to be treated–with empathy, respect, and offers of help.	Starts with the same claim of fact as in the title and the previous paragraph: most people would cross the border illegally. Adds the idea that we wouldn’t feel it was wrong. The implication is that if all these people would feel it is right, then it really is “ethical and reasonable.” “We must recognize” implies a claim of policy–that people should talk about illegal crossings publicly in a different way than we do now. Claim of policy: Border walls and detention centers are not right. Ends with three policy recommendations for how to treat migrants: empathy, respect, and help.

Notice that attempting to summarize each claim can actually take more space than the original text itself if we are summarizing in detail and trying to be very precise about what the text claims and implies. Of course, we won’t want to or need to do this in such detail for every paragraph of every reading we are assigned to write about. We can resort to it when the argument gets harder to follow or when it’s especially important to be precise.

 

Exercises

Make notes in your own words on the claims of fact, value, and policy you find in an argument you are reading for class or one of our suggested readings. Make a table with two columns and paste the argument into the first column. In the second column, summarize the points the author makes as in the example above. If you like, you can make a copy of this Google Docs notes template.

Deciding Which Is the Main Claim

 

Now that we have this list of claims in the margin of the text, we know some of the things that the author wants us to believe. How do we sort them and put them in relation to each other? In this case, we found claims of policy, fact, and value, some of which were repeated in different parts of the argument. Which claim is the main point? How do other claims support this one?

We can try asking ourselves the following questions to see if we already have a sense of what the argument’s goal is.

• What does the writer want us to believe?
• What does the writer most want to convince us of?
• Where is the writer going with this?
• If the writer had to make their point in just one sentence, what would they say?

A good first place to look for the focus, of course, is the title. Often the title will declare the main claim outright. Here, the title question “Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?” implies the answer “Yes.” We can look for the same idea in the text and check whether it seems to be the main one. The third paragraph describes why the author would cross the border and then generalizes to claim that others would do the same. At the start of the last paragraph, the writer declares that “ …most of us, under desperate circumstances, would cross the border without permission and feel no moral qualms about doing so.” Note that this is a claim of fact about what people would do and how they would feel about it.

But is this the main claim? When we review the other sections, we find several other claims of policy. Introductions set expectations, and here, the first paragraph alludes to public debates on immigration policy. It suggests that it may not be right to stop people from coming into America, and it may not be wrong to cross the border, even illegally. These early references to what is right suggest that the argument aims to do more than describe how people might feel under different circumstances. The argument is going to weigh in on what border policy should be. The second paragraph confirms this sense as it builds up to the still vague sentence, “ Surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions.”

In the last paragraph, we learn what these ways might involve. Three different claims of policy emerge:

1. “… We must recognize this crossing as an ethical, reasonable act.”
2. “How can either a wall or a detention center be on the side of justice?” (The implication, of course, is that they cannot be.)
3. “ We must find a policy that treats migrants as we would want to be treated–with empathy, respect, and offers of help.”

Which of these final claims is the overall focus? Arguments sometimes emphasize their main point in the very last sentence, in part to make it memorable. However, the end of the argument can also be a place for the author to go a little beyond their main point and suggest issues for further thought. The phrase “empathy, respect, and offers of help” sounds important, but we should note that the rest of the argument isn’t about how to help migrants. However, the idea that we should respond more positively to migrants has recurred throughout. The idea that migrants are not in the wrong–that they are not criminals–is clearly key, and so is the idea that we should change border policy accordingly.

Here is one way, then, to combine those last two ideas into a summary of the overall claim of the argument:

Claim: Border policy should not criminalize undocumented immigrants.

 

Exercise

Choose an argument you are reading for class or one of our suggested readings, read it closely, and then try to summarize the main claim in your own words. If you are unsure, return to making notes on the writer’s claims and then reflect on the questions above.

Finding the Counterarguments

Very often, as we read an argument we will find not just what the author thinks and believes, but the author’s description of other people’s opposing arguments as well. An argument is part of an ongoing broader conversation about the subject, and the writer can remind us of what they are responding to. So as we read we can look for and mark these counterarguments.

In a complex text it can be easy to miss that a particular point is actually not one that the writer agrees with–they may be bringing it up in order to shoot it down. We can look out for particular phrases that are often used in academic writing to signal that the writer is switching sides temporarily and describing an idea that goes against the argument.

Very often the way the author will both signal to us that they are introducing the counterargument and signal their attitude toward it. They will convey the degree to which they disagree and the respect or contempt they feel for this opposing view.

Common Phrases That Introduce Counterarguments

Attitude to the Counterargument	Phrases
Negative The writer thinks the counterargument is completely wrong.	It is a popular misconception that_____________. Some have fallen for the idea that_____________. Many people mistakenly believe that_____________.
Neutral The writer is about to describe a counterargument without giving their opinion yet.	Many people think _____________. Some, on the other hand, will argue that _____________. Some might disagree, claiming that _____________. Of course, many have claimed that _____________. Some will take issue with _____________, arguing that _____________. Some will object that _____________. Some will dispute the idea that _____________, claiming that _____________. One criticism of this way of thinking is that _____________. Note that these neutral examples don’t tell us whether the writer thinks the counterargument has any validity. Usually, the writer will want to follow them with a sentence that does reveal their opinion.
Positive The writer sees some merit in the counterargument. They agree with it even though it hurts their argument. This is called concession.	It is true that ___________. I do concede_____________. We should grant that_____________. We must admit that_____________. I acknowledge that _____________. X has a point that _____________. Admittedly, _____________. Of course, _____________. To be sure, _____________. There may be something to the idea that _____________.

In the border argument example, the writer never directly mentions other writers who disagree. Instead, they signal with the phrase “I admit” that they are going to summarize a valid point which goes against their own main argument: “I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk.”

We could add this to our map as follows, with the counterargument in red to show it goes against the rest of the argument:

 

 

 

Exercises

• Choose an argument you are reading for class or one of our suggested readings. You may want to focus on a short excerpt of one or more paragraphs.
• Read your text closely and identify any counterarguments it mentions. What is the writer’s attitude to each counterargument?
• Describe each counterargument in your own words and add it to your argument map. You can handwrite your map or copy this Google Drawings template.

Finding the Responses to the Counterarguments

After a writer summarizes another perspective, they will signal that they are switching back to their own perspective. If they have not already given a hint about their attitude to the other side, they will have to make their response clear now. Do they see the counterargument as completely wrong-headed, or as having some merit?

If the writer completely disagrees with the counterargument, they will follow up their description of it by pointing out its flaws. This direct rebuttal will bring the readers back to the writer’s side. If they have just conceded a point, they will now emphasize the reason why their own argument still holds. The more the writer has credited the counterargument, the more they will need to explain why readers shouldn’t accept it, at least not completely. Below are some phrases which can point toward the problem or limitation of the counterargument.

 

Common Phrases for Responding to Counterarguments

Attitude to the Counterargument	Phrases
If the writer considers the counterargument totally wrong	This idea misses the fact that _____________. I disagree because _____________. This depends on the assumption that _____________ which is incorrect because _____________. This argument overlooks _____________. This argument contradicts itself _____________. This is mistaken because _____________.
If the writer partly agrees with the counterargument	It is true that ___________, but___________. I do concede_____________, and yet___________. We should grant that_____________, but we must still acknowledge that ___________. We can admit that____________ and still believe that ___________.. I acknowledge that _____________, and yet we should nevertheless recognize that _____________. Critics have a point that _____________; however it is more important that we focus on _____________. Admittedly, _____________. However, ___________. Of course, _____________, but I still insist that__________.. To be sure, _____________; but _____________. There may be something to the idea that _____________, and yet _____________.

In the border argument example, the writer concedes that the counterargument does have merit: “I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk.” Immediately, the writer responds, “But surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions.” The word “but” signals the transition from concession back to the writer’s own side. In the map, we can put the rebuttal below the counterargument and use the arrow to show it supporting the main claim.

 

 

 

Exercises

• Choose an argument you are reading for class or one of our suggested readings. You may want to focus on a short excerpt of one or more paragraphs.
• Read your text closely and identify any counterarguments it mentions. What is the writer’s attitude to each counterargument?
• Decide what your attitude to this counterargument is.  Choose a phrase from the above table to introduce the counterargument.

Finding the Limits on the Argument

 

If we are getting ready to summarize and respond to an argument, we need to notice exactly how the writer has qualified or limited what they are saying.

Often writers will strengthen their case against the counterargument by taking a step back and limiting what they are claiming. They might make an exception for a particular case which they can’t support. Or they might clarify that their claim only applies to a particular group or situation.

Faced with a powerful counterargument, a writer might also admit a certain degree of uncertainty about their claim as a whole. They might consider the argument worth putting forward for consideration even if they are not sure it is right.

Common Phrases Used to Limit Arguments

Kinds of limitations on arguments	Phrases
Expressing less than perfect certainty	Perhaps, ________. It is worth considering the idea that ________. ________ may________. ________might________. ________could possibly________. Probably, ________. Very likely, ________. Almost certainly,________.
Limiting what the argument is claiming or restricting the scope of the argument	Few ________. In a few cases, ________. Some________. Many________. Most________. The vast majority of ________. Almost all________. ________ unless________. If it is not the case that________, then ________. ________, except in the case that ________. We can exclude cases where _____________.

When we read arguments, we can watch for these limitations and add them to our argument map. In the case of the border argument, limitations are found throughout. We have highlighted them and commented on them below.

Sample Notes on an Argument’s Limits

Argument	Notes
Title: Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?	Not limited at all–a universal “all”
All the disagreement over immigration policy I have been hearing about in the news lately reminds me that while I believe in the rule of law, I feel profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of keeping people out who are desperate to come in. Is illegal immigration actually wrong? Is it unethical to cross a border without permission?	Limits the group of immigrants we are talking about to those who are desperate. This is an argument about refugees of one kind or another, not about people who just feel they would be happier or more successful in the U.S. So maybe the author would still consider it fine to criminalize those who cross illegally because they prefer to live in the U.S. if they are not currently in dire straits.
I don’t have a clear vision yet of what the right border policy would be, and I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk. But surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions.	Clarifies that some “regulation” of borders is okay. Their argument does not condemn all efforts to establish rules and consequences at the border. Again, this clarifies that this only applies to migrants with a compelling reason to cross.
If I were raising children in an impoverished third-world community plagued by violence, and if I had a chance to get my family to the U.S., I would take it. I would try to cross a border illegally so my children would get enough to eat and would have a more stable childhood and a chance at a better education and a better career. What parent would sit on their hands and tell themself, “I want to give my child a better life, but oh well. If I don’t have the papers, I guess it would be wrong”?	Outlines a specific circumstance that would justify crossing illegally, implying that other circumstances might not justify it.
If most of us, under desperate circumstances, would cross the border without permission and feel no moral qualms about doing so, then we must recognize this crossing as an ethical, reasonable act. If it is ethical and reasonable, then how can either a wall or a detention center be on the side of justice? We must find a policy that treats migrants as we would want to be treated–with empathy, respect, and offers of help.	Repeats the limitation to migrants who are desperate. Note: The final sentences don’t mention any limitation on which migrants we are talking about.

The main limitation, then, can be entered into the argument map in blue and in brackets thus:

 

Now that we have analyzed the parts of the argument and their relations to each other, we are ready for the next step demanded by most college writing assignments. Chapter 3 will discuss how to write a clear and precise summary of an argument.

 

Exercises

• Choose an argument you are reading for class or one of our suggested readings. You may want to focus on a short excerpt of one or more paragraphs.
• Read your text closely and identify any limits it puts on any of its claims.
• Describe each limit in your own words and add it to your argument map. You can handwrite your map or copy this Google Drawings template.

Common Argument Phrases

Here are all of the common phrases discussed in Chapter 2 for introducing different elements of an argument. The section headings link to more information.

 

Claims

 

Claims of policy

• We should _____________.
• We ought to _____________.
• We must _____________.
• Let’s _____________.
• The best course is _____________.
• The solution is to _____________.
• The next step should be _____________.
• We should consider _____________.
• Further research should be done to determine _____________.

 

Claims of fact

• Research suggests that _____________.
• The data indicate that _____________.
• _____________is increasing or decreasing.
• There is a trend toward _____________.
• _____________causes _____________
• _____________leads to _____________.

 

Claims of value

• _____________is terrible/disappointing/underwhelming.
• _____________is mediocre/average/decent/acceptable.
• We should celebrate _____________.
• _____________is great/wonderful/fantastic/impressive.

 

Comparative claims of value

• _____________is the best _____________.
• _____________is the worst _____________.
• _____________is better than _____________.
• _____________is worse than _____________.
• _____________is just as good as _____________.
• _____________is just as bad as _____________

 

Reasons

• Because_____________, _____________.
• Because of this, _____________.
• If_____________, then _____________.
• Since_____________, _____________.
• For this reason,_____________.
• We can conclude_____________.
• Therefore, _____________.
• So_____________.
• Consequently, _____________.
• As a result, _____________.
• Hence_____________.
• Thus_____________.
• It follows that _____________.

 

Counterarguments

 

Mistaken counterarguments

• It is a popular misconception that_____________.
• Some have fallen for the idea that_____________.
• Many people mistakenly believe that_____________.

 

Neutrally described counterarguments

• Many people think _____________.
• Some, on the other hand, will argue that _____________.
• Some might disagree, claiming that _____________.
• Of course, many have claimed that _____________.
• Some will take issue with _____________, arguing that _____________.
• Some will object that _____________.
• Some will dispute the idea that _____________, claiming that _____________.
• One criticism of this way of thinking is that _____________.

 

Counterarguments that have merit

• It is true that ___________.
• I do concede_____________.
• We should grant that_____________.
• We must admit that_____________.
• I acknowledge that _____________.
• X has a point that _____________.
• Admittedly, _____________.
• Of course, _____________.
• To be sure, _____________.
• There may be something to the idea that _____________.

 

Rebuttal to a counterargument

• This idea misses the fact that _____________.
• I disagree because _____________.
• This depends on the assumption that _____________ which is incorrect because _____________.
• This argument overlooks _____________.
• This argument contradicts itself _____________.
• This is mistaken because _____________.

 

Concession to a counterargument

• It is true that ___________, but___________.
• I do concede_____________, and yet___________.
• We should grant that_____________, but we must still acknowledge that ___________.
• We can admit that____________ and still believe that ___________..
• I acknowledge that _____________, and yet we should nevertheless recognize that _____________.
• Critics have a point that _____________; however it is more important that we focus on _____________.
• Admittedly, _____________. However, ___________.
• Of course, _____________, but I still insist that__________..
• To be sure, _____________; but _____________.
• There may be something to the idea that _____________, and yet _____________.

 

Limits

 

Less than perfect certainty

• Perhaps, ________.
• It is worth considering the idea that ________.
• ________ may________.
• ________might________.
• ________could possibly________.
• Probably, ________.
• Very likely, ________.
• Almost certainly,________.

 

Narrowing the scope of the argument

• Few ________.
• Some________.
• Many________.
• Most________.
• The vast majority of ________.
• Almost all________.
• ________ unless________.
• If it is not the case that________, then ________.
• ________, except in the case that ________.
• We can exclude cases where _____________.

This chapter is from “Chapter 2: Reading to Figure out the Argument” in How Arguments Work: A Guide to Writing and Analyzing Texts in College by Anna Mills under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license.