The Arrangement of an Argument

In continuing my discussion about the importance of arranging an argument in order to make that argument more clear and persuasive, I was thinking of an instance recently where I have seen a good example of this. I couldn't think of any off the top of my head, but it came to me pretty quickly after I started doing research for another psychology class of mine.

For another class, I was assigned to research the pros and cons associated with cosmetic surgery on dogs as sort of a fun end of the semester debate project. While I was searching for information, a story appeared in my search that was posted by a man on yahoo telling of his dog barks excessively and asking whether or not he should have his dog "debarked," which is a surgery removing part of the vocal cords to soften but not completely eliminate the dog's ability to bark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debarking). Of course, many people responded to the post with varying opinions, but as I read the responses, I noticed that a few of the arguments people made were better than others.

The yahoo posting and the responses can be found at: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080718192951AAJ21lV.

The argument that I found to be the most persuasive was posted by a person who, ironically, organized their argument in such a way that it was easy and clear to follow. (hmm...this is exactly what Crowley mentions in my argumentative writing textbook as being important to think about when organizing an argument). This person actually numbered the main points within their argument, separating three different subcategories that all help prove his argument that a bark collar should be used before debarking a dog. Each of his categories is also expanded upon, not only by giving his own opinion, but by backing up his own thoughts with stories of failures of debarking surgeries, for example. At the end of his argument, he summarizes his points and even gives a link that we can visit to learn more about the debarking debate.

Although this response was short, and it would be far more difficult to organize and arrange an entire paper, this person's argument was clearly well thought out and easy to read. His points were also good, making it more persuasive than most of the arguments posted as responses to this man's story of his barking dog. The only thing missing from this person's argument was an introduction, which I do not think was even needed because the subject matter was clear as well as relevant to all who were reading the responses of what to do with a barking dog.