Developing Your Main Points

The Architecture of Argument: A Deep Dive into Developing Main Points

In the realms of academic and business communication, the ability to construct a compelling argument is not merely a skill but the foundational pillar upon which influence, credibility, and success are built. The core of any persuasive or informative document lies in its main points—the strategic, load-bearing columns that support the overarching thesis. Developing these points is an architectural endeavor, requiring a blueprint grounded in audience analysis, a structure built with logical integrity, and a finish of rhetorical finesse. It is a process that transforms a simple assertion into a resonant and convincing argument, capable of navigating scrutiny and achieving its intended purpose.

I. The Blueprint: Audience-Centric Point Formulation

The genesis of powerful main points lies not in the writer’s mind alone, but in the anticipated mind of the reader. Effective communication begins with a rigorous audience analysis, a process of gathering as much information as possible to understand who they are, what they care about, and what they need. [1] This extends beyond basic demographics like age or economic status to psychographics, which encompass the audience’s attitudes, beliefs, and values. [2] For instance, a business proposal for a new technology aimed at a board of directors prioritizing fiscal responsibility will fail if its main points exclusively champion innovation without addressing return on investment. Conversely, a pitch to a team of engineers would be unconvincing without deep technical specifications. Therefore, the first commandment of structuring an argument is to “Know thy audience.” [3] This knowledge dictates not only the content of the main points but also their framing. A crucial question to ask is, “What’s in it for me?” (WIIFM) from the reader’s perspective. [3] By uncovering the factors that motivate the audience, a writer can craft main points that highlight reader benefits, transforming a sender-focused message into a reader-oriented one that is significantly more persuasive. [3] This strategic empathy is the bedrock of development; it ensures the points are not just stated, but are relevant, resonant, and received.

II. The Superstructure: Logical Integrity and Fallacy Avoidance

Once the foundational understanding of the audience is established, the main points must be erected with unimpeachable logical structure. The basic framework of an argument consists of claims (the main points) supported by evidence. [4] The arrangement of these claims is paramount. A common and effective method is a topical or categorical organization, but more sophisticated arguments might employ chronological, problem-solution, or cause-and-effect sequencing to create a narrative flow that guides the reader’s reasoning. [4] However, the strength of this structure is perpetually at risk from logical fallacies—common errors in reasoning that undermine the argument’s validity. [5] An argument that relies on a “slippery slope” fallacy, for example, might contend that allowing employees to work from home one day a week will inevitably lead to the complete dissolution of office culture and productivity. [6] This is an erroneous conclusion because it assumes a chain of events without sufficient evidence. [5] Similarly, a “straw man” fallacy oversimplifies and attacks an opponent’s viewpoint rather than addressing the actual, more complex argument. [5] A writer must act as their own most stringent critic, interrogating each point for weaknesses like hasty generalizations (drawing conclusions from insufficient evidence) or appeals to false authority (citing non-experts). [7][8] By consciously avoiding these pitfalls, the writer fortifies their argument, ensuring it stands on a foundation of sound reasoning rather than deceptive rhetoric, thereby earning the trust and respect of a critical audience. [9][10]

III. The Finishing Touches: Substantiation and Rhetorical Resonance

A logically sound structure of main points remains a mere skeleton until it is fleshed out with robust evidence and polished with rhetorical skill. Each main point must function as a mini-thesis, introduced by a clear topic sentence and substantiated with a blend of supporting details. [11][12] The types of evidence used will vary by discipline but can include empirical data, statistics, expert testimony, or illustrative examples. [13][14] The key is not merely to present this evidence, but to integrate it seamlessly, following a pattern of stating the claim, presenting the evidence, and then commenting on how that evidence validates the claim. [15] This commentary is the act of analysis, where the writer interprets the evidence to refine and bolster their argument. [15] To make these points truly memorable, writers can employ rhetorical strategies. Techniques like anaphora, the repetition of a word or phrase at the beginning of successive clauses (as famously used by Martin Luther King Jr. in his “I Have a Dream” speech), can create a powerful, rhythmic emphasis. [16][17] Metaphors and similes can make complex ideas more relatable by drawing comparisons to familiar concepts, such as framing innovation “like a seed; it requires the right environment to grow and flourish.” [16][17] These devices, combined with strong transitional phrases that bridge one point to the next, ensure the argument is not only intellectually convincing but also engaging and impactful, leaving a lasting impression on the audience. [18][19]