How To Create Stronger Analysis

How can I create stronger analysis? Overview Choosing  the  right  evidence  can  be  crucial  to  proving  your  argument,  but  your  analysis  of  that  evidence  is   equally  important.  Even  when  it  seems  like  evidence  may  speak  for  itself,  a  reader  needs  to  understand  how   the  evidence  connects  to  your  argument.  In  addition,  because  analysis  requires  you  to  think  critically  and   deeply  about  your  evidence,  it  can  improve  your  main  argument  by  making  it  more  specific  and  complex.   General Considerations What  Analysis  Does:  Breaks  a  work  down  to  examine  its  various  parts  in  close  detail  in  order  to  see  the  work  in   a  new  light.   What  an  Analysis  Essay  Does:  Chooses  selective  pieces  of  evidence  and  analysis  in  order  to  arrive  at  one  single,   complex  argument  that  makes  a  claim  about  the  deeper  meaning  behind  the  piece  being  analyzed.  In  the   essay,  each  piece  of  evidence  selected  is  paired  with  deep  analysis  that  builds  or  elaborates  on  the  last  until   the  thesis  idea  is  reached.   Analysis  should  be  present  in  all  essays.  Wherever  evidence  is  incorporated,  analysis  should  be  used  to  connect   ideas  back  to  your  main  argument.   In Practice Answer  Questions  that  Explain  and  Expand  on  the  Evidence   Asking  the  kinds  of  questions  that  will  lead  to  critical  thought  can  access  good  analysis  more  easily.  Such   questions  often  anticipate  what  a  reader  might  want  to  know  as  well.  Questions  can  take  the  form  of   explaining  the  evidence  or  expanding  on  evidence;  in  other  words,  questions  can  give  context  or  add  meaning.   Asking  both  kinds  of  questions  is  crucial  to  creating  strong  analysis.     When  using  evidence,  ask  yourself  questions  about  context:   • What  do  I  need  to  tell  my  audience  about  where  this  evidence  came  from? • Is  there  a  story  behind  this  evidence? • What  is  the  historical  situation  in  which  this  evidence  was  created? Also  ask  yourself  what  the  evidence  implies  about  your  argument:   • What  aspects  of  this  evidence  would  I  like  my  audience  to  notice? • Why  did  I  choose  this  particular  piece  of  evidence? • Why  does  this  evidence  matter  to  my  argument? • Why  is  this  evidence  important  in  some  ways,  but  not  in  others? • How  does  this  evidence  contradict  or  confirm  my  argument?  Does  it  do  both? • How  does  this  evidence  evolve  or  change  my  argument? Example:  “There’s  nothing  wrong  with  being  a  terrorist,  as  long  as  you  win,”  stated  Paul  Watson  at  an   Animal  Rights  Convention.     Argument:  Violent  action  is  justified  in  order  to  protect  animal  rights.     Questions  that  explain  the  evidence:  What  did  Watson  mean  by  this  statement?  What  else  did  he  say  in   this  speech  that  might  give  more  context  to  this  quote?  What  should  the  reader  pay  attention  to  here  (for   example,  why  is  the  word  “terrorist”  here  especially  important)?       Questions  that  expand  on  evidence:  Why  is  this  quote  useful  or  not  useful  to  the  argument?  How  does   Watson’s  perspective  help  prove  or  disapprove  the  argument?  How  do  you  think  the  reader  should   interpret  the  word  “terrorist”?  Why  should  the  reader  take  this  quote  seriously?  How  does  this  evidence   evolve  or  complicate  the  argument—does  what  Watson  said  make  the  argument  seem  too  biased  or  simple   if  activism  can  be  related  to  terrorism?       Be  Explicit         Because  there  may  be  multiple  ways  to  interpret  a  piece  of  evidence,  all  evidence  needs  to  be  connected   explicitly  to  your  argument,  even  if  the  meaning  of  the  evidence  seems  obvious  to  you.  Plan  on  following  any   piece  of  evidence  with,  at  the  very  least,  one  or  two  sentences  of  your  honest  interpretation  of  how  the   evidence  connects  to  your  argument—more  if  the  evidence  is  significant.       Example:  Paul  Watson,  a  controversial  animal  rights  activist,  started  his  speech  at  the  Animal  Rights   Convention  with  a  provocative  statement:  “There’s  nothing  wrong  with  being  a  terrorist,  as  long  as  you   win.”  His  use  of  the  word  ‘terrorist’  refers  to  aggressive  actions  taken  by  animal  rights  groups,  including   Sea  Shepard,  under  the  guise  of  protecting  animals.  While  his  quote  might  simply  be  intended  to  shock  his   audience,  by  comparing  animal  activism  to  terrorism,  he  mocks  the  fight  against  international  terrorism.     Allow  Analysis  to  Question  the  Argument     Sometimes  frustrations  with  analysis  can  come  from  working  with  an  argument  that  is  too  broad  or  too  simple.   The  purpose  of  analysis  is  not  only  to  show  how  evidence  proves  your  argument,  but  also  to  discover  the   complexity  of  the  argument.  While  answering  questions  that  lead  to  analysis,  if  you  come  across  something   that  contradicts  the  argument,  allow  your  critical  thinking  to  refine  the  argument.     Example:  If  one  examined  some  more  evidence  about  animal  activism  and  it  became  clear  that  violence  is   sometimes  the  most  effective  measure,  the  argument  could  be  modified.  The  more  complex  argument   might  be:  “Violent  action  by  animal  activists  might  be  akin  to  “terrorism”  and  deemed  unacceptable,  but  it   does  make  more  of  an  immediate  impact  and  gets  more  press.  Without  such  aggressive  actions,  animal   rights  might  be  seen  in  a  better  light.”   Avoid  Patterns  of  Weak  or  Empty  Analysis   Sometimes  sentences  fill  the  space  of  analysis,  but  don’t  actually  answer  questions  about  why  and  how  the   evidence  connects  to  or  evolves  the  argument.  These  moments  of  weak  analysis  negatively  affect  a  writer’s   credibility.  The  following  are  some  patterns  often  found  in  passages  of  weak  or  empty  analysis.   1. Offers  a  new  fact  or  piece  of  evidence  in  place  of  analysis.  Though  it  is  possible  to  offer  two  pieces  of evidence  together  and  analyze  them  in  relation  to  each  other,  simply  offering  another  piece  of  evidence  as a  stand  in  for  analysis  weakens  the  argument.  Telling  the  reader  what  happens  next  or  another  new  fact  is not  analysis. Example:  “There’s  nothing  wrong  with  being  a  terrorist,  as  long  as  you  win,”  stated  Paul  Watson  at  an   Animal  Rights  Convention.  According  to  PETA,  hunting  is  no  longer  needed  for  sustenance  as  it  once   was  and  it  now  constitutes  violent  aggression.   2. Uses  an  overly  biased  tone  or  restates  claim  rather  than  analyzing.  Phrases  such  as  “this  is  ridiculous” or  “everyone  can  agree  that  this  proves  (fill  in  thesis  here)”  prevent  the  reader  from  seeing  the  subtle significance  of  the  evidence  you  have  chosen  and  often  make  a  reader  feel  the  writing  is  too  biased. Example:  According  to  PETA,  The  Jane  Goodall  Institute  estimates  that  5,000  chimpanzees  are  killed  by   poachers  annually.  This  ridiculous  number  proves  that  violence  against  animals  justifies  violent  activist   behavior.   3. Dismisses  the  relevance  of  the  evidence.  Bringing  up  a  strong  point  and  then  shifting  away  from  it rather  than  analyzing  it  can  make  evidence  seem  irrelevant.    Statements  such  as  “regardless  of  this evidence”  or  “nevertheless,  we  can  still  argue”  before  analyzing  evidence  can  diminish  the  evidence  all together. Example:  Paul  Watson  was  expelled  from  the  leadership  of  Greenpeace.  Nevertheless,  his  vision  of   activism  should  be  commended.   4. Strains  logic  or  creates  a  generalization  to  arrive  at  the  desired  argument.  Making  evidence  suit  your needs  rather  than  engaging  in  honest  critical  thinking  can  create  fallacies  in  the  argument  and  lower  your credibility.  It  might  also  make  the  argument  confusing. Example:  Some  companies  are  taking  part  in  the  use  of  alternatives  to  animal  testing.  But  some   companies  does  not  mean  all  and  the  ones  who  aren’t  taking  part  are  what  gives  animal  activists  the   right  to  take  drastic  action.   5. Offers  advice  or  a  solution  without  first  providing  analysis.  Telling  a  reader  what  should  be  done  can  be fine,  but  first  explain  how  the  evidence  allows  you  to  arrive  at  that  conclusion. Example:  Greenpeace  states  that  they  attempt  to  save  whales  by  putting  themselves  between  the   whaling  ship  and  the  whale,  and  they  have  been  successful  at  gaining  media  support,  but  anyone  who   is  a  true  activist  needs  to  go  further  and  put  whalers  at  risk.     Exercise For  the  following  pairings  of  evidence  and  analysis,  identify  what  evasive  moves  are  being  made  and  come  up   with  a  precise  question  that  would  lead  to  better  analysis.  Imagine  your  working  thesis  is  as  follows:  Message   communications  came  to  life  in  order  to  bring  people  closer  together,  to  make  it  easier  to  stay  connected  and  in   some  instances  they  have.  More  often  however,  these  forms  of  communication  seem  to  be  pushing  people   apart  because  they  are  less  personal.     1. An  article  In  USA  Today  last  year  had  the  headline,  “Can  Love  Blossom  in  a  Text  Message?”  I’m  sure  most people’s  gut  reaction  would  be  a  resounding,  “Of  course  not!”  The  article  discusses  a  young  woman  whose boyfriend  told  her  he  loved  her  for  the  first  time  in  a  text  message.  Messaging  is  clearly  pushing  people  apart. 2. In  fact  in  the  United  States  today,  there  are  an  estimated  250,146,921  wireless  subscribers.  Evidence  shows that  a  person  is  more  likely  to  first  establish  communication  with  someone  you  are  interested  in  via  text message  or  a  form  of  online  messaging  via  Facebook,  Myspace,  email,  or  instant  messenger.  People  find  these means  of  communication  less  stressful.  This  is  because  they  are  less  personal. 3. This  way  of  communicating  is  very  new,  with  text  message  popularity  skyrocketing  within  only  the  last  five years,  the  invention  of  instant  messaging  gaining  popular  use  through  AOL  beginning  in  1998,  and  websites such  as  Myspace  and  Facebook  invading  our  computers  within  only  the  last  5  years.  Regardless  of  this  change in  communication  technology,  these  forms  of  communication  do  not  bring  people  together. 4. The  way  some  people  wish  others  “Happy  Birthday”  is  another  example.  On  birthdays,  if  you  are  on Facebook,  your  wall  becomes  flooded  with  happy  birthday  wishes,  which  is  nice.  However,  if  one  of  your  close friends  or  perhaps  a  sibling  simply  wishes  you  a  happy  birthday  on  Facebook,  you  probably  will  feel  a  little cheated.  It  is  important  to  know  where  you  stand  in  your  relationships,  and  if  the  person  is  actually  important to  you,  you  should  take  the  time  to  call  them  in  this  kind  of  situation. 5. Studies  suggest  that  over  90%  of  the  meaning  we  derive  from  communication,  we  derive  from  the  non-­‐ verbal  cues.  These  nonverbal  cues  include  body  language,  facial  expression,  eye  movement  and  contact, posture,  gestures,  use  of  touch  (such  as  hug  or  handshake),  vocal  intonation,  rate  of  speech,  and  the information  we  gather  from  appearance  (Applebaum,  108).  It’s  terrible  to  think  that  such  important  things  are said  with  only  a  mere  10%  of  their  meaning  being  properly  conveyed.  Phone  calls  can  eliminate  some  of  these problems. 6. Many  people  now  have  “Top  Friends”  on  their  Facebook  profile  where  they  rank  their  friends  in  order  of importance.  Sure  most  of  us  have  a  couple  people  who  we  refer  to  as  our  “best  friends,”  but  never  before  this online  ranking  phenomenon  has  the  order  in  which  you  rank  your  friends  been  public  knowledge.  This  shows that  friendship  has  lost  all  meaning. Answer  Key   1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. argues  with  tone  and  uses  a  generalization introduces  new  evidence  and  uses  generalizations dismisses  evidence offers  advice  or  a  solution  and  dismisses  evidence argues  with  tone  and  offers  advice uses  a  generalization Resources:   http://www.peta.org/mc/facts.asp   http://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/history/paul-­‐watson/   Last  updated  June  2011