Well this is what I say!!

In essence what I took from They say I say was the necessity for good explanation. It references an earlier readings that emphasized the need for using good language that everyone can understand. As well as language that is relevant. This piece expounds on that; giving illustrations on how to present information. It gives a few templets on how this can be done. I feel this is very important for a writer to build a well rounded argumentative paper. When you introduce the opposing view of the topic, you can as the reading says, you agree but with a difference. Now once done properly the context although it may be the opposition it will build on to your own topic. For example if I were arguing a music group and their popularity I might just say, Coldplay an alternative rock band is a popular band even if not everyone likes them. Now to me that is a week statement. I feel that by saying, although Coldplay may not be the most popular band around they have lead the alternative rock genre of music for many years and have gathered a huge fan base. Both statement are true and both contain the same information but by introducing the opposition and then showing the writers view makes for a much better statement. The other point to showing both sides of an argument that I find to be very valuable is to show the opposition first then your own stance. My reasoning behind this is you make a point a lot quicker then having to go “full circle.” Also the reader will remember the last things said. Now the issue this piece does give is that the techniques presented are wrote, and repetitive. Now because they are templates they should be switched up often. That is what I plan to do, use them but only to the point where they do not become repetitive. I will have to force myself to figure out my own way to present the information at hand.