Essay Writing and Advanced Punctuation in English
Tom outlines his essay
As a next step, I note my ideas down in form of an 'outline' of my argumentation structure and arrange my ideas according to the questions and arguments I want to present in three paragraphs (body of my text). Then I add one introductory and one concluding paragraph. My outline looks like this.
Title: On Killing Animals for Food
Introductory paragraph
(My main idea for this paragraph is to answer the question: Is it natural to kill and eat animals?)
(Here I note down the main idea of this paragraph, which is: Are animals inferior beings because they can not think or speak like humans?)
Introductory paragraph
- A vivid introduction to the topic(I like personal and vivid introductions. See below.)
- Importance of the topic (I always say why the topic is important.)
- Controversy (I usually say that the topic is controversial. Most topics are.)
- Should we kill animals for food? (Here I usually explain my essay question.)
- Summary of my argumentative approach. (I explain how I am going to approach the question; but I only know how I am going to do it after studying my brainstorming results and matching the sources, that means after finishing the outline.)
- Signalling transition to the next main idea, i.e. the second paragraph.(I write a sentence that connects the idea of this paragraph with the next idea.)
(My main idea for this paragraph is to answer the question: Is it natural to kill and eat animals?)
- I introduce my paragraph thesis (As an introduction, I use Piazza’s 4n’s: normal, natural, necessary and nice. They will also serve to structure my paragraph.)
- I state my paragraph thesis (It should not be seen as natural or normal.)
- I support my thesis. Support 1 (I will support this with the Boell Stiftung Fleischatlas: Billions of animals are killed each year. Here I write my interpretation or conclusion: The mere number is not normal or natural anymore. (Reason 1)
- Support 2 (I will support this with Gerber: Livestock sector’s a strong factor for climate change. Here I write my interpretation or conclusion: It has even a negative effect on nature. (Reason 2)
- Support 3 (I will support this with Kastner: The world could feed more human beings if we ate the wheat and corn ourselves. My conclusion: So it’s not even necessary for the survival of the human species. I support this also with Alexander: 25kg of feed for one kg of beef.)
- Support 4 (Would it be nice if animals were treated with as little pain inflicted as possible? I will use the Rolston quote to introduce the question. This will be a counterargument I refute: The way animals are treated is neither natural nor nice; market laws prescribe the way animal are treated.
- Conclusion (I draw the conclusion here: animals are treated as a product – it can never become ‘nice’.)
- I write a sentence connecting this paragraph to the next(I signal the transition to the next main idea, i.e. the second paragraph.)
(Here I note down the main idea of this paragraph, which is: Are animals inferior beings because they can not think or speak like humans?)
- Introduction(First I introduce my paragraph thesis. As an introduction, I use Rolston and Hsiao’s inferiority theses: animals are no equal part of society as they are no moral beings.)
- Refusal of counterargument(Then I refute this counterargument, which leads to my paragraph thesis: it’s based on the idea animals have no status because they can not defend themselves verbally.)
- Support(I support this with the reason that some humans can also not defend themselves verbally.)
- Support(I support this also with Ryder and Singer: speciesm, painism)
- Conclusion(I draw a conclusion: animals ought to be granted rights as suffering beings.
- Transition signal(I write a sentence connecting this paragraph to the next: I signal the transition to the next main idea, i.e. the third paragraph.)
- Introduction(First I introduce my paragraph thesis. As an introduction, I use the genetic similarity between humans and animals.)
- Thesis(I state my paragraph thesis: biological and mental similarity is enough to grant rights because of our ethics)
- Support(I support this with Comstock: animals can feel pain like humans.)
- Support(I support this with MacMahan: animals can feel happiness like humans.)
- Conclusion(I draw a conclusion: animals ought to be granted rights as fellow species on earth. I do not write a sentence connecting this paragraph with the final one because it is the concluding paragraph. My argumentation ends here).
- Restating my essay question(I mention my general question again: should we kill animals for food?)
- Summary(I summarize my findings: not natural, not necessary, not nice, not fair, speciesm, new morality)
- Limitations(I recognize and acknowledge limitations of my essay but state my findings.)
- Recommendations for further studies (I make recommendations for further studies.)