Writing Analytically, 6th Edition - Rosenwasser, David & Stephen, Jill [111]
Writers who think that evidence speaks for itself generally do very little with it. Sometimes they will present it without making any overt claims, stating, for example, “There was no alcohol at the party,” and expecting the reader to understand this statement as a sign of approval or disapproval. Alternatively, they may simply place the evidence next to a claim: “The party was terrible—there was no alcohol,” or “The party was great—there was no alcohol.” Juxtaposing the evidence with the claim (just putting them next to each other) leaves out the thinking that connects them, thereby implying that the logic of the connection is obvious. But even for readers prone to agreeing with a given claim, simply pointing to the evidence is rarely enough.
Of course, before you can attend to the relationship between evidence and claims, you first have to make sure to include both of them. But before we examine the problems posed by leaving either one out (evidence or claims), let’s first consider what it is that evidence is meant to do.
THE FUNCTION OF EVIDENCE
A common assumption about evidence is that it is “the stuff that proves I’m right.” Although this way of thinking about evidence is not wrong, it is much too limited. Corroboration (proving the validity of a claim) is one of the functions of evidence— but not the only one.
It helps to remember that the word prove actually comes from a Latin verb meaning “to test.” The noun form of prove, proof, has two meanings: (1) evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true or believable and (2) the act of testing for truth or believability. When you operate on the first definition of proof alone, you are far more likely to seek out evidence that supports only your point of view, ignoring or dismissing other evidence that could lead to a different and possibly better idea. You might also assume that you can’t begin writing until you have arrived at an idea you’re convinced is right, since only then could you decide which evidence to include. Both of these practices close down your thinking instead of leading you to a more open process of formulating and testing ideas.
The advantage to following the second definition of the word proof—in the sense of testing—is that you will be better able to negotiate among competing points of view. Doing so will predispose your readers to consider what you have to say because you are offering them not only the thoughts a person has had, but also a person in the act of thinking. Writing well means sharing your thought process with your readers, telling them why you believe the evidence means what you say it does.
“BECAUSE I SAY SO”: UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS
Problem: Making claims that lack supporting evidence.
Solution: Use concrete details to support and sharpen the claim.
Unsubstantiated claims occur when a writer concentrates only on conclusions, omitting the evidence that led to them. At the opposite extreme, pointless evidence results when a writer offers a mass of detail attached to an overly general claim. Both of these problems can be solved by offering readers the evidence that led to the claim and explaining how the evidence led there.
The word unsubstantiated means “without substance.” An unsubstantiated claim is not necessarily false; it just offers none of the concrete “stuff ” upon which the claim is based. When a writer makes an unsubstantiated claim, he or she has assumed that readers will believe it just because the writer put it out there.
Perhaps more important, unsubstantiated claims deprive you of details. If you lack some actual “stuff ” to analyze, you tend to overstate your position and leave your readers wondering exactly what you mean. The further away your language gets from concrete, physical details—things that you can see, hear, count, taste, smell,