This week we're going to end Cora's argument for the stock market. Although this procedure took several weeks to explain, Cora finalized her paper within a week. If your teens decide they want to write about the stock market, they can use this topic. If they want to write about the stock market from a different approach, we'll give you some ideas today in her information used to dispute her claim below. For starters, here's Cora's initial paragraph:

"The stock market is the best investment tool, because charts and statistics prove the stock market historically offers the best return on our initial investment. This is important information for teens who want to save money for college. However, we can never predict the future, and the stock market is no exception. What if we invest our money and the stock market fails to respond as it has in the past? I will argue that the best solution to this problem lies in building a diversified and long-term portfolio of equities and index funds."

Cora built her paper around charts and information that explained the history of the stock market. She also described index funds, and showed how a diversified portfolio built with equities and these funds was her idea of the best solution for building a long-term portfolio. Now, Cora's final portion of her argument must include a paragraph or two that admits contrary evidence to her claim. In other words, she gathers evidence to fit her claim, but she also needs to be objective and include evidence to or about alternate possibilities. We've relied on "The Craft of Argument" for building this paper (information below), and the authors list a few reasons why we might consider an opposing stance to our initial claim:

1. If we resist contrary evidence in our argument, we might become further entrenched in our viewpoint and become unwilling to hear other solutions to a problem.
   
   
2. Many people tend to become overconfident in their claims, and this position also tends to blind the debater to change.
   
   
3. People may jump to conclusions after gathering too little evidence, and this makes an argument weak.
   
   
4. People may ignore evidence entirely because they trust their warrants to explain their case fully (see last week about warrants).

Cora's claim might be disputed in at least a dozen different ways. However, Cora picked just two ideas to show she understood her claim was debatable, and to also show her argument was strong. For instance, here are two samples that might be used to refute Cora's claim:

Cora's responses (I swear I didn't help her!):

Now, Cora needs to define a "risk." For instance, there is a possibility of losing money under various circumstances, like selling equities for needed money when the market is down. She also needs to offer some other possibilities for savings. Fortunately, her mother writes for a company that offers numerous potential solutions for investors, including bond funds and IRAs. BUYandHOLD also offers the opportunity to invest in equities according to an individual's lifestyle.

Cora learned a lot about how to build an argument with this school paper. In fact, she thought she learned so much that she tried to argue with me. It didn't work, because she forgot to be unbiased, unemotional, and she refused to admit contrary evidence in her defense. Let's see what happened:

Cora: "I believe I'm old enough to learn how to drive, because all my friends are learning how to drive."
Me: "How old are your friends?"
Cora: "They're my age."
Me: "Who's teaching them how to drive?"
Cora: "Their parents."
Me: "Do you think I drive well enough to teach you how to drive?"
Cora (laughing): "You're a good driver?"
Me: "If I'm not a good driver, then I can't teach you how to drive."
Cora: "I didn't mean to laugh. Will you teach me?"
Me: "No, because if you think I'm not a good driver, then you won't listen to me."
Cora (stomping foot): "Mom!"
Me: "Go build a better argument."

Cora actually had a great argument, but she didn't support it very well. She was biased about her needs, and she didn't offer an alternative solution to her problem (like learning to drive with a certified instructor). Additionally, she laughed at her opponent. Never, ever, laugh at a debate partner, even if you know you're winning, and especially if the opponent is a parent. Finally, she became angry when her opponent nixed the argument. If she maintained her cool, she might be taking driving lessons today (maybe). Of course, it always helps to argue with anyone other than a parent.

An argument is a difficult form to follow, but it becomes easier with practice. The lessons become even more understandable when we realize how our claims can be disputed. Then, we begin to realize the strength or weakness of our stance. As for me, I will agree with Cora - at least with her well-defined argument about the stock market. As for the driving? Hmmm?.

Until Next Week,
Linda Goin

* The Craft of Argument was written by Joseph M. Williams (U. of Chicago) and Gregory G. Colomb (U. of VA), Longman Publishing, 2001.