I don’t have a clear vision yet of what the right border policy would be, and I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk. But surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions.

We can often paraphrase the claims more readily on a second read when we are already familiar with the content. Some need the physicality of taking notes by hand in the margins of a book or a printout.

Often these claims are simply presented as fact, and an uncritical reader may not see them as arguments at all. However, very often claims of fact are more controversial than they seem. For example, consider the claim, “Caffeine boosts performance.” Does it really? How much? How do we know? Performance at what kind of task? For everyone? Doesn’t it also have downsides? A writer could spend a book convincing us that caffeine really boosts performance and explaining exactly what they mean by those three words.

A claim of value can also make a comparison. It might assert that something is better than, worse than, or equal to something else. Some phrases that signal a comparative claim of value include these:

Note that the above arguments all include claims of fact but go beyond observing to praise or criticize what they are observing.

The most familiar kind of argument demands action. It is easy to see when the writer is asking readers to do something. Here are a few phrases that signal a claim of policy, a claim that is pushing readers to do something:

In other cases, the writer is not just trying to convince us that something is a certain way or causes something, but is trying to say how good or bad that thing is. They are rating it, trying to get us to share her assessment of its value. Think of a movie or book review or an Amazon or Yelp review. Even a “like” on Facebook or a thumbs up on a text message is a claim of value

Claims of Fact

Here are all of the common phrases discussed in Chapter 2 for introducing different elements of an argument. The section headings link to more information.

Title: Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?

The main limitation, then, can be entered into the argument map in blue and in brackets thus:

Faced with a powerful counterargument, a writer might also admit a certain degree of uncertainty about their claim as a whole. They might consider the argument worth putting forward for consideration even if they are not sure it is right.

If the writer completely disagrees with the counterargument, they will follow up their description of it by pointing out its flaws.

Positive  The writer sees some merit in the counterargument. They agree with it even though it hurts their argument. This is called concession.

Negative  The writer thinks the counterargument is completely wrong.

Reason → Claim Reason A → Reason B → Claim Reason A → Claim Reason B ↗