Argument

Abstract

This chapter will argue that research is argument. The approach replaces words like theory, proposition, inductive-deductive loop, thesis, hypothesis and literature review with, “What is your argument” “What evidence will you present in support of your argument?” and, “How will you anticipate the counter argument?” It invokes the court-room analogy. The advocate tells the jury what they intend to argue and then presents the evidence to support that argument. The approach is similar to the one suggested by saying research is about telling convincing stories.

Senior Professor, “What do you intend to research?”

Junior Professor, “Why computers are so popular in commerce”

Senior Professor, “What will be your argument?”

Junior Professor, “I do not intend to argue for anything! I intend to be scientific, impartial, independent, beyond reproach! Using institutional theory I will study the data and come to some unbiased conclusion about why computers are so popular in commerce.”

Senior Professor, politely, “Oh sorry, er... what made you think about studying computer popularity?“

Junior Professor, “Wen is seems pretty obvious to me the main reason that firms use computers is simply to appear professional, in most cases the blasted things are counterproductive.”

Senior Professor, “Ah, so that is is your argument.”