Page 69 - Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing, 2nd Ed
P. 69

56  SMART THINKING: SKILLS FOR CRITICAL UNDERSTANDING & WRITING


           be well formed, but they make claims about the world that our audience
           finds hard to accept precisely because they appear to have no foun-
           dation.



       Well-formed claims

       Writing clear claims

       Smart thinking requires, first of all, that our claims be well formed. Before we
       even think about how the links between claims might develop—and before we
       even consider whether or not our claims are acceptable—we need to write or
       speak clear claims. While this task is similar to all clear writing or speaking, it is
       not exactly the same. Some of the rules of narrative exposition (such as not
       repeating words too frequently, the proper use of clauses within sentences, and so
       on) do not apply at this stage. Most of these rules generate implied links between
       clauses and sentences; but since your analytical diagram clearly shows these links,
       we do not need to complicate the claims in this way. Remember, the analytical
       structure format is designed first and foremost for planning; the good exposition
       will come later.
          So, the primary aim in writing well-formed claims in an analytical structure
       format is to make each a separate statement that contains all the information
       necessary for it to express what we mean. The very act of writing the claim
       carefully will, of itself, help us to understand better what it means. For example,
       the claim 'Violence against indigenous Australians is wrong' is unclear and
       vague—even though we would all agree with the sentiment, it is not a 'good'
       claim. If it is rewritten (for example, to read 'Violence against indigenous
       Australians by white settlers colonising Australia had and continues to have a
       negative effect on the moral order of the nation'), then the claim is not as easy
       to read but clearly shows the meaning of the claim, ready for linking analytically
       to other claims.
          Even at this first stage, as we put together our claims as the basis for our text,
       we cannot avoid the role of context. The meaning of every word we use is not a
       fixed absolute, but a socially and culturally constructed convention. By this I mean
       that the meaning of a word is always determined in relation to all the other words
                                                      1
       and meanings that are in use within a particular society.  Though, for most
       purposes, the words (and hence the claims) we use seem to be clear in what they
       mean, we can never simply assume that our audience will always grasp our exact
       meaning. In particular, while the surface meanings of various words are usually
       commonly accepted, the connotations (or hidden implications and understand-
       ings) of words can vary subtly between different groups of people.
          For example, many people in Cuba (still governed within a Marxist system)
       would not consider the USA a democracy, since people in the USA do not have
       equal access to education, health, and welfare, whereas in Cuba they do (and thus
   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74