Introduction:
Creating conflict within an essay is critical for engaging readers and making an argument compelling. Developing effective conflict can also be challenging. This article will discuss why conflict is important for essays, different types of conflict writers can employ, techniques for implementing conflict, and examples from published works.
Why is conflict important?
There are several key reasons why incorporating conflict into an essay is important. First, conflict creates interest and tension, drawing readers into the discussion. Without some level of disagreement or opposing viewpoints, an essay risks becoming dull or preachy. Conflict challenges readers’ assumptions and gets them thinking critically about an issue from different angles. It also mirrors real-world debates where there are rarely easy or unanimous answers on complex topics.
Secondly, conflict provides the impetus for the writer’s overall argument. An essay needs to stake out a position and then defend it persuasively. Introducing counterarguments or criticisms of that stance establishes the need to address alternative perspectives. This gives the essay a more debate-like structure where the author must refute those opposing views. Doing so strengthens the credibility of their final conclusion.
Finally, conflict engages readers on an emotional level by triggering feelings like doubt, frustration or curiosity. Rather than readers passively processing neutral facts, conflicting views ignite their interest and investment in trying to resolve the debate. This keeps readers turning pages to see how the author will build their case despite the objections raised. In these ways, strategic use of conflict keeps an essay compelling from start to finish.
Types of Conflict
There are different types of conflict writers can employ within an essay based on the specific goals, approach or subject matter. Some common varieties include:
Thesis vs. antithesis: Presenting a clear main argument but also outlining the strongest counterargument to set up analytical refutation. This classic philosophical structure mirrors the building of a debate.
Multiple perspectives: Surveying diverse viewpoints on an issue from academics, experts, cultures or time periods to show its complexity. The essay then distinguishes the superior view.
Interpretive disputes: Exploring how different readers or scholars have interpreted certain works, events, concepts or data in conflicting ways to prove one is most accurate or illuminating.
Cultural/ideological tensions: Analyzing clashing beliefs, assumptions or experiences across genders, classes, religions, etc. that underlie social or political debates.
Ethical dilemmas: Addressing scenarios or policies with reasonable arguments on both sides of a contentious moral issue to justify one as more ethical.
Techniques for Using Conflict
Once authors have selected an appropriate type of conflict for their specific essay, certain techniques can make that conflict most effective:
Opening with the strongest counterargument to immediately engage readers and set up the task to follow.
Ensuring counterpositions are characterized fairly without straw-man fallacies to maintain credibility.
Using transitional phrases like “while some argue…” or “on the other hand” to clearly set off conflicting perspectives.
Directly quoting dissenting experts or works to show alternative views rigorously considered.
Addressing counterarguments one by one over consecutive body paragraphs to thoroughly refute them.
Employing logic, facts and reasons to disprove objections rather than just dismissing them.
Concluding by emphasizing how anticipated criticisms have been handled to reinforce the final stance.
Implementing Conflict in Practice
To see how conflict plays out compositionally, consider this example thesis from David Foster Wallace’s essay “Tense Present”:
“It is foolish and wrong to think that enjoyment of seriously difficult black postmodernist fiction is proof of one’s intellectual superiority or one’s PC liberal social inclusiveness.”
Right away, Wallace conceptualizes the debate as pretentious readers vs. those more open to challenging books. In body paragraphs, he provides supporting examples yet also describes the mindset of “pretentious” readers to undermine their view fairly. By the end, Wallace persuasively argues complex books need not be elitist if addressed accessibly and generously. His judicious use of conflict keeps readers engaged as viewpoints clash and get resolved.
Conclusion
Incorporating productive conflict is essential for writing compelling, persuasive essays. It mirrors real-world debates, helps structure effective arguments, and sparks reader interest through competing perspectives. While common types of disagreement exist, implementing conflict skillfully requires techniques like fairly characterizing dissent, directly addressing counterarguments, and using logic and examples rather than dismissal. When done judiciously, confrontation enhances analysis and brings the essay’s stance convincing life, as authors like Wallace have shown. Overall, strategic use of conflict is a hallmark of sophisticated, engaging essay writing.