1. THE THESIS AS STARTING POINT It is important to have a working thesis before you begin writing your paper. By creating a thesis first, you will be able to: focus your thinking: a thesis guides your thought process during the writing of your paper. focus your thinking: a thesis guides your thought process during the writing of your paper. stay on track while writing: similarly, a thesis gives you a focal point for your argument and for your supporting paragraphs; each paragraph should connect back to the thesis. stay on track while writing: similarly, a thesis gives you a focal point for your argument and for your supporting paragraphs; each paragraph should connect back to the thesis. think about your reader: the thesis statement is a promise you make to the reader – it is what your reader will take away from the paper. By creating the thesis, you can think from the perspective of both the writer and the reader, and make certain that your paper fulfills your promise to your reader. think about your reader: the thesis statement is a promise you make to the reader – it is what your reader will take away from the paper. By creating the thesis, you can think from the perspective of both the writer and the reader, and make certain that your paper fulfills your promise to your reader.

2. 2 PARTS A thesis usually has two parts: A thesis usually has two parts: Topic: states the subject of the essay Topic: states the subject of the essay Comment: states what you will prove about that subject Comment: states what you will prove about that subject Without a comment, a thesis is merely a topic sentence—there is no argument being offered. This is fine for writing an overview or a book report, but it is insufficient for an argumentative essay. Without a comment, a thesis is merely a topic sentence—there is no argument being offered. This is fine for writing an overview or a book report, but it is insufficient for an argumentative essay. Without a specific topic, a comment (or argument) is impossible. You need to have a clear understanding of the topic (and a solid base of knowledge about the topic) before you can form an opinion on it and build an argument around it. Without a specific topic, a comment (or argument) is impossible. You need to have a clear understanding of the topic (and a solid base of knowledge about the topic) before you can form an opinion on it and build an argument around it.

3. “In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli puts forth a political philosophy that is far more complex and sophisticated than the popular understanding of the word “Machiavellian” implies.” “In The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli puts forth a political philosophy that is far more complex and sophisticated than the popular understanding of the word “Machiavellian” implies.” 1) Topic (what the paper is about): Machiavelli’s political philosophy 2) Comment (what the paper will prove about this topic): Machiavelli’s political philosophy is frequently oversimplified and misrepresented. This is an effective working thesis: it establishes a clear topic and a comment about that topic, though it could probably be a bit more specific (it might be useful for the writer to establish HOW Machiavelli’s philosophy is complex and sophisticated, or to DEFINE what the word “Machiavellian” implies). Still, it gives the writer a clear goal.

4. THE QUALITIES OF A GOOD THESIS STATEMENT A good thesis statement has four major characteristics: A good thesis statement has four major characteristics: Specific as possible in wording and ideas: always try to be specific with both the purpose of the argument and the words you use to define the argument. Avoid abstract words, general terms, or vague ideas. Specific as possible in wording and ideas: always try to be specific with both the purpose of the argument and the words you use to define the argument. Avoid abstract words, general terms, or vague ideas. Potentially interesting to your intended audience: a good thesis should capture the interest of your readers. Avoid “fact-based” theses that simply provide the reader with information. Raise the stakes of the argument by making a dynamic and insightful claim. Potentially interesting to your intended audience: a good thesis should capture the interest of your readers. Avoid “fact-based” theses that simply provide the reader with information. Raise the stakes of the argument by making a dynamic and insightful claim. Limits the topic to make it manageable: a thesis should not try to tackle an issue from every side, nor should it deal with an overly complicated subject. Focus in on a specific element of the topic and keep the paper manageable. Limits the topic to make it manageable: a thesis should not try to tackle an issue from every side, nor should it deal with an overly complicated subject. Focus in on a specific element of the topic and keep the paper manageable. Debatable (leaving room for counterarguments): make sure that your argument is debatable. Remember, you are presenting an argumentative claim, not a fact. Debatable (leaving room for counterarguments): make sure that your argument is debatable. Remember, you are presenting an argumentative claim, not a fact.

5. ASSESS THIS THESIS “In The Prince, Machiavelli states that fear is more important than love when governing a country.” Interesting? –This thesis does not tell the reader anything new or insightful. Interesting? –This thesis does not tell the reader anything new or insightful. Specific? – The thesis focuses on a specific element of Machiavelli’s philosophy, but it does not make a specific claim. Specific? – The thesis focuses on a specific element of Machiavelli’s philosophy, but it does not make a specific claim. Manageable? – The thesis is manageable, but only because the topic is so straightforward. The writer is setting up an overview of part of Machiavelli’s philosophy as opposed to offering an argument about that philosophy. Manageable? – The thesis is manageable, but only because the topic is so straightforward. The writer is setting up an overview of part of Machiavelli’s philosophy as opposed to offering an argument about that philosophy. Arguable ? – The thesis fails to present an argument. Instead, it presents a fact. Arguable ? – The thesis fails to present an argument. Instead, it presents a fact.

6. ASSESS THIS THESIS “Machiavelli’s political philosophy is wrong.” Interesting? – The writer is disagreeing with Machiavelli, which could lead to an interesting argument, though the thesis does not provide enough detail to capture the reader’s interest. Interesting? – The writer is disagreeing with Machiavelli, which could lead to an interesting argument, though the thesis does not provide enough detail to capture the reader’s interest. Specific? – The thesis is too broad. It tackles a very broad subject—“Machiavelli’s political philosophy”—and it uses a very broad term to critique it—“wrong.” Is it morally wrong? Logically wrong? What does the writer mean by “wrong”? Specific? – The thesis is too broad. It tackles a very broad subject—“Machiavelli’s political philosophy”—and it uses a very broad term to critique it—“wrong.” Is it morally wrong? Logically wrong? What does the writer mean by “wrong”? Manageable? – The thesis is rather unmanageable. It deals with a very broad subject, and it does not define “wrongness” concretely enough to guide the writer’s supporting paragraphs. Manageable? – The thesis is rather unmanageable. It deals with a very broad subject, and it does not define “wrongness” concretely enough to guide the writer’s supporting paragraphs. Arguable? – The thesis presents an argument, albeit a vague one; still, the writer is on the right track by making a debatable claim (others might argue that Machiavelli was right.) Arguable? – The thesis presents an argument, albeit a vague one; still, the writer is on the right track by making a debatable claim (others might argue that Machiavelli was right.)

7. Machiavelli’s political philosophy is wrong. – As noted on the previous slide, this thesis does not meet our criteria; it is too vague, too broad, and lacking in details. Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic for several reasons. – This thesis is a bit stronger than the previous version. It replaces “wrong” with “problematic” (which is a more specific term), and it establishes that there are reason for the disagreement, even though it does not list the reasons; unlike the first version, the disagreement with Machiavelli has a basis in actual issues as opposed to its being based on the reader’s response or feelings. This thesis is setting up an argument as opposed to a response paper. Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because it promotes selfishness, tyranny, and cruelty. – The writer is now listing specific issues that he or she disagrees with in Machiavelli. He or she seems to be setting up a 5- paragraph essay, one that will cover the three vices listed above: selfishness, tyranny, and cruelty. Still, selfishness, tyranny, and cruelty are fairly big, broad concepts. It might be helpful for the writer to narrow the focus of the paper further. Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because of its emphasis on the self-interest of political leaders. – Here, the writer has chosen to focus on one specific problem in Machiavelli’s political philosophy: selfishness. Moreover, he or she has attributed that selfishness to a specific group: political leaders. The focus of the paper is now much tighter and more specific. Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because of its emphasis on the self-interest of political leaders; leaders should seek to serve something larger than themselves, but Machiavelli’s prince seeks only to preserve his own power. – Here, the writer takes the thesis one step further by actually defining WHY the self-interest of political leaders (as discussed by Machiavelli) is problematic. This is a dynamic and interesting thesis because the writer is outlining specific terms for the argument: he or she has put forth a description of what a leader SHOULD do, and set it in contrast to what Machiavelli’s prince does. Machiavelli’s political philosophy, as documented in The Prince, is problematic because of its rejection of noble virtues in favor of practical self-interests. Instead of aspiring to serve a higher ideal, Machiavelli’s prince conspires to preserve his own power and wealth. – This thesis is even stronger than the previous version, mainly because of how it is worded. The writer creates a wonderful sense of balance in the thesis by using parallelism (“noble virtues” vs. “practical self-interests”; “aspiring to serve a higher ideal” vs. “conspires to preserve his own power.”) Consider the following theses. Each one is a bit better than its predecessor; notice how each thesis improves in terms of its specificity, its dynamism, and its scope. The final thesis is probably the best of all the examples listed below, but it has grown naturally from the previous theses.

8. ASSESS THIS THESIS “On Game of Thrones, many characters have a Machiavellian view of political power.” Interesting? Interesting? Specific? Specific? Manageable ? Manageable ? Arguable ? Arguable ? How can we make this better?

9. On Game of Thrones, many characters have a Machiavellian view of power. – This thesis makes an interesting observation, but it does not really indicate why that observation is significant, nor does it address any of the larger consequences regarding the Machiavellian characters on the TV series. On Game of Thrones, many characters, such as Tywin, Littlefinger, and Tyrion, have a Machiavellian view of power. – Here the writer is providing some examples, but the thesis is still lacking somewhat in terms of its argumentative strength. The reader is not quite sure what the writer intends to prove. Here again, the writer seems to be setting up a fairly broad 5-paragraph essay. On Game of Thrones, Tyrion Lannister has a Machiavellian view of power. – Here, the writer has narrowed the focus to just one character (probably the most interesting of the three characters.) Since Tyrion Lannister is viewed by many fans as a “good guy,” the writer is making a fairly bold claim by labeling Tyrion as Machiavellian. Though many fans of the series Game of Thrones view Tyrion Lannister as a sympathetic character, he takes a Machiavellian approach to governance. – This thesis establishes that the writer is taking a dynamic and unique position. By indicating that “many fans” like Tyrion, the writer is defining his or her thesis in contrast to what most people expect or believe, which can make for an interesting argument. Though many fans of the series Game of Thrones view Tyrion Lannister as a sympathetic character, Tyrion actively supports a tyrannical and psychotic king, willingly ignores an incestuous conspiracy to destroy a dynasty, and constantly puts practical goals over higher ideals. His actions are therefore Machiavellian. – Here, the writer goes one step further by establishing Tyrion’s Machiavellian activities. These are the supporting examples that will likely dominate the supporting paragraphs. Like in the second thesis, the writer is setting up a five paragraph essay, but he or she is now doing so in a much more focused way. Though many fans of the series Game of Thrones view Tyrion Lannister as a sympathetic character, his willingness to ignore moral codes and reject virtuous ideals for the sake of preserving his own family’s power makes him a Machiavellian character. – This thesis is meant to provide a somewhat “cleaner” version of the previous thesis. Instead of listing all of the examples, it simply uses one sentence to summarize how the examples are connected (all of the examples show that Tyrion will compromise morality for the sake of keeping the Lannisters in power). Either of the two theses would work, but this one is a little bit less overwhelming than the previous version. Then again, if the writer wishes to provide the reader with a “road map” of the examples that will follow in the supporting paragraphs, he or she might want to use the previous thesis. Consider the following theses. Each one is a bit better than its predecessor; notice how each thesis improves in terms of its specificity, its dynamism, and its scope. The final thesis is probably the best of all the examples listed below, but it has grown naturally from the previous theses.