This will be a dialectic essay.  The basic idea behind a dialectic essay is that it follows one train of thought through a sort of dialogue (hence "dialectic") of argumentation.  The essay will be judged on how well it is written, and how well the author has followed the directions below.  The essay should be about 2 double-spaced typed pages.  It is a concentrated writing and thinking exercise and may be very different from the kinds of papers you are used to.

Directions:
         The essay should consist of just four sections, and the entire paper should not exceed 2 pages (i.e., 600 words maximum).  Each section must be clearly labeled, and should limit itself to the specific task of that section.

 The first section should be labeled "Thesis" and should not, in general, take more than one paragraph to state.  You must develop your own thesis, but that thesis should claim that some person or group (e.g., a government) ought to perform some action.  For example, one thesis might be "The state of Massachusetts should legalize marijuana".  In addition to stating your thesis in a single, clear sentence — the thesis section might include an example or certain caveats, which could serve to fend off misinterpretation.  However, this is not necessary, and it should not go so far as to begin arguing for the thesis.  In the above example, one might want to add a sentence clarifying whether people of any age would be allowed to smoke marijuana, or whether there would still be laws against smoking and driving.  The thesis section should simply make very clear what is being asserted by the thesis, and this could take no more than a sentence.

         The second section presents a single argument for, and not a restatement of, the thesis.  It should consist of reasons given for the thesis.  These reasons should be things one would expect a rational reader to find quite plausible.  The most important thing is this:  if a person accepts these reasons (premises), then her logical thought processes should lead her to accept the thesis as well.  This is because the thesis is in some way supported, made more probable, or perhaps proven, by the reasons.

         The third section responds (as though in an argument or debate) with an objection to the argument presented in the second section.  This is not to be an objection to the thesis, but a direct response to the specific argument found in section 2 for that thesis.  In other words, this section gives reasons to believe that the argument in section 2 is flawed in some way, and this is consistent with the claim that the thesis is true.  The goal of the objection is not to show that the thesis is false, but rather to show that the argument in section 2 fails to establish its truth.

         The last section is a response to the objection in the third section.  It should not be a restatement (even reformulated) of section 2.  Instead, it is to be a direct counter-response (again as in a debate) to the specific objection just given in section 3.  By this point one will likely have moved away from discussing the thesis, since at this time you are arguing that there is some flaw in the objection (which itself may have little to do with the thesis).  Do not offer a new argument for the thesis.  Focus on criticizing section 3.
 
 

Note:  The only section that directly concerns the truth of the thesis is section 2.  Every section is concerned solely with the section which immediately precedes it, so section 3 is in no direct way concerned with the truth of the thesis in section 1 — it is only concerned with the soundness of the argument in section 2.  Analogously for section 4.
 

Click here to see an example outline.