7.7 An argument under the microscope 297
ways. By the writing ‘style’, we mean the
claims as they are expressed in a particular
piece of text, complete with any
emotional appeals, sarcastic touches,
colourful phrases and so on. In paragraph
1 there are plenty; so it is more than just
an introduction.
3 a One pragmatic reason the author
offers is that a permanent site
will, arguably, reduce the threat of
terrorism by depoliticising the Games.
This would obviously be of practical
benefit to athletes and spectators, and
even to the organisers whose profits
would be affected if the threat of a
terrorist attack deterred people from
attending the Games. The inclusion of
the word ‘practical’ in the text marks
this as a pragmatic reason.
b By contrast there is no obvious
practical benefit behind the argument
that Greece is where the Games were
invented and where the name comes
from. We are told that the Games are
‘rightfully’ the property of Greece
for these historical reasons, and for
that reason alone they should be
held there. The general principle
underlying this strand of reasoning
is that the inventor or originator of
something has a moral and/or legal
ownership of it. This applies not
just to this particular context, but to
authors, artists, explorers and others –
in fact any person or group who can
claim to have discovered, created or
invented something.
4 There is clearly an assumption in
paragraph 2 that historical reasons
should play a part in the debate. Without
this assumption the conclusion just
doesn’t follow. Another way to say this
is that there is a missing premise. If the
author wanted to spell this premise out
it would have to be something like: ‘The
issue is a historical one.’ Merely sayingargument. If the reasons supported only
the claim that it was justifiable, without
saying why it was also sensible, the
argument would be unsound, because it
would be incomplete. Similarly, if the
argument didn’t establish that one
permanent site was more justifiable and
sensible than a different site each time,
again the reasoning would be inadequate.
‘Athens should be the site of the next
Olympic Games’ would not be a
sufficiently accurate and inclusive answer.
‘The Greek capital should be the
permanent home of the Olympic Games;
no other solution can be justified or
makes sense’ would be fine.
2 The first paragraph is introductory. It
sets up the context for the argument
as a whole without giving either the
conclusion or any supporting reasons.
You could describe the author’s style of
writing in the first paragraph in a number
of ways: for example, humorous, sarcastic,
scornful, dismissive, pejorative. It is
achieved by means of phrases like:
‘running and jumping... (not) on the
athletics track’, which makes the
excitement she is talking about seem
childish; and the word ‘extravaganza’,
which suggests that the current Olympic
Games are over-glamorised. Janet Sender
is probably trying to make the reader feel
that the ‘fuss’ over the hosting of the
Games is all a bit unnecessary, and a bit
ridiculous. If it works, this can have the
effect of ‘softening the reader up’ for the
reasoned argument that is to come. In
other words it is a rhetorical device, rather
than straightforward reasoning.
When you are evaluating an argument
it is important to look out for features of
persuasive writing and distinguish
between them and the reasoning itself.
By the ‘reasoning itself’, we mean the
underlying claims, which could be
expressed in any number of different