Scribd
Upload
2K views

Writing A Position Paper

The document outlines the key elements and characteristics of a strong position paper. It explains that a position paper aims to generate support for an issue by describing the author's position and rationale based on evidence. The classic structure includes an introduction stating the issue and position, a body with background information, evidence for the position, and a discussion of counterarguments, and a conclusion reiterating key points. It then lists 10 characteristics of a good position paper, such as having a clear purpose, being well-organized, substantive, and mechanically correct.

Uploaded by

Gracie Ching
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
2K views

Writing A Position Paper

The document outlines the key elements and characteristics of a strong position paper. It explains that a position paper aims to generate support for an issue by describing the author's position and rationale based on evidence. The classic structure includes an introduction stating the issue and position, a body with background information, evidence for the position, and a discussion of counterarguments, and a conclusion reiterating key points. It then lists 10 characteristics of a good position paper, such as having a clear purpose, being well-organized, substantive, and mechanically correct.

Uploaded by

Gracie Ching
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Position Paper Diagram

Image taken from bowiestate.libguides.com. Retrieved from


https://bowiestate.libguides.com/c.php?g=442189&p=3014828. September 18, 2019.

An author who writes a position paper is making an argument which has to be built upon evidence. The
structure used to do this is very similar to that used when writing a critical essay.

Purpose

The purpose of a position paper is to generate support on an issue. It describes the


author’s position on an issue and the rational for that position and, in the same way
that a research paper incorporates supportive evidence, is based on facts that provide a
solid foundation for the author’s argument. It is a critical examination of a position
using facts and inductive reasoning, which addresses both strengths and weaknesses of
the author’s opinion.

Elements of the Position Paper

The classic position paper contains three main elements:


An Introduction, which identifies the issue that will be discussed and states the
author’s position on that issue.
The Body of the paper, which contains the central argument and can be further broken
up into three unique sections:
Background information
Evidence supporting the author’s position
A discussion of both sides of the issue, which addresses and refutes arguments
that contradict the author’s position
A Conclusion, restating the key points and, where applicable, suggesting resolutions to
the issue.

Ten Characteristics of a Good Position Paper

1) A paper should be in the author’s own words.

This is probably the most basic requirement. Plagiarism is intentionally or


unintentionally representing somebody else’s ideas as one’s own, and should
be avoided at all costs. You may, of course, appeal to the ideas of others, if
you acknowledge doing so and site your sources appropriately.

2) A position paper should have a clear purpose.

Your readers should always have a clear understanding of what you’re going
to do in your paper.

I find it helpful to think about position papers as attempts to answer specific


questions, and to think about think of position papers as falling to four
general kinds, according to the types of questions they attempt to address.

There are four general kinds of position papers, and each has it’s own type
of objective.

1. Expositive writing tries to answer questions of the form “What did A say
or think about P?” “What did A mean in the following passage?” and so
on.

Generally speaking, expositive writing and consists of summarizing or


setting out the ideas of a given philosopher in your own words, in order to
help your reader to understand material that is otherwise obscure or hard
to follow. It often involves arguing for or against a certain interpretation
of that philosopher’s ideas by showing that this interpretation is more or
less consistent with other writings by the same philosopher, entails
consequences which the philosopher would or would not be willing to
accept, etc.
2. Comparative writing takes up questions like “How are positions X and Y
similar, and how to do they differ?” “What is the relationship between the
arguments for X and Y?” and “How do philosophers A and B compare
with respect to their thinking on P?”

As with expositive writing, comparative writing will usually require you


to summarizing or setting out the arguments and positions your own
words. It will also require you to defend your claims of commonality and
difference.

3. Evaluative writing considers such questions as “Is position P plausible?”


“Is P more or less plausible than Q?” “Is the argument for P strong?” “Is
the argument for P stronger or weaker than the argument for Q?”

If a position seems to contradict what we know, or if we can find a case


which seems to contradict the position, that’s a mark against the position.
If an argument assumes things we have reason to doubt, or which can’t
be believed without accepting the conclusion, or if those ideas don’t seem
to support the conclusion the argument wants to us draw, that’s a mark
against the argument.

4. Constructive writing is unlike expositive, comparative, or evaluative


writing in that the questions it considers are less directly concerned with
pre-existing positions or arguments. Instead of asking “What did A think
about P?” for example, constructive writing asks “What should we think
about P?” or “What’s the truth about P?”

In defending a position of our own, usually involves an analysis and


evaluation of particularly relevant and influential work in order to
elucidate or advance our own position, carefully supporting our position
with argument, and responding to actual or potential objections.

3) A paper should be well organized.

Your paper as a whole, and each part of your paper, should work to fulfill
the purpose of the paper. It should take up each task in the order most
helpful to meeting that objective and finish one thing before starting another.

4) A paper should flow.


Ensure that your paper flows nicely from one point to the next. Avoid
sudden jerks. Use smooth transitions.
Organizational cues, including section headings, transitions, subject-
changes, and summaries of what will be or has been done, can help your
reader to follow your paper.
If there is more than one argument, ensure that your readers understand
how the arguments are related to each other (e.g. one argument might be
your own position, another argument might be a possible objection, a third
argument might be a response to that objection, etc.)

5) A paper should be clear.

Make sure that you really understand what you’re saying and that an average
member of your audience could be expected to understand it, too. When it
doubt about your audience, the positions and arguments should be stated in
such a way that they would be understood by a reasonably intelligent reader
who is unfamiliar with the material.
If you are going to set out an argument (either your own or another
person’s) make certain to include all of the important ideas and ensure that
the connections between the ideas are as clear as possible.
It really helps to read your work out loud and ask yourself “If I were
someone else, would I understand this?” It also helps to provide your reader
with guiding questions, definitions of specialized terminology, descriptions
of positions, and important distinctions.

6) A paper should be complete.

Think slowly. Don’t jump to conclusions. Flesh out all ideas and arguments
in sufficient detail and ensure that you adequately defend claims that need
defending.
Sometimes, specific examples can help to flesh out and support
general claims.

7) A position paper should be focused.

Try not to include irrelevant or inessential material, unrelated the attainment


of the paper’s purpose. If you aren’t going to discuss an argument, for
example, don’t spend time setting it out.

8) A position paper should be substantively correct.


Attribute positions to the right person and represent those positions
correctly. Always try to avoid speculating about an author’s motivations
because motivations are difficult to establish and are usually irrelevant to the
merits of an author’s case.
Ensure that your own reasoning avoids serious errors of fact or logic.
If you aren’t sure that your interpretation is correct, or that your argument is
sound, admit it.
Note actual or possible objections to your position, interpretation or
argument. If you admit possible problems, and discuss them intelligently,
they don’t really count as mistakes.

9) A position paper should be mechanically correct, adhering to the rules of style


and usage.

10) Ideally, a position paper should be creative, asking new questions, answering
old questions in new ways, seeing new things, seeing old things in new ways,
or making an original point.

Of course, it’s one thing to know what makes a good paper; it’s quite another thing
to write one. So let’s take a look at the writing process itself.

Sources:

Retrieved from:
https://www4.uwsp.edu/philosophy/dwarren/CTBook/06RLArguments/characteristics.htm. September
18, 2019

You might also like