Inventing an Argument via Hypothesis

Inventing an Argument via Hypothesis

Definitions/Introduction:

A hypothesis is a statement that you intend to prove by the course of the experiment. It is what you think will happen as the end result of the experiment. The hypothesis is in the introduction and is an assertion of what one believe will happen through ones experiment. A hypothesis is needed because it is the rock for which the whole experiment basis itself off of. If having trouble with a hypothesis then start with an “if...then....therefore” statement. For example, when formulating a hypothesis about if a turtle swims the “if, then, therefore” statement would read: If a turtle can swim then when placed in water the turtle will swim, therefore this breed of turtle can swim. They do seem redundant but it is the essence of what exactly one is trying to prove. Error is what could have went wrong with the experiment, or what affected the results. If one drops the turtle then the turtles ability to swim could be compromised. Therefore the results would not be valid for all turtles.

The Outline:

Inventing and argument via hypothesis is much like a scientific paper. This means that the paper will not so much be all one large conversation but actually be broken up into a few sections that compartmentalize ones experiment. The sections in order are: introduction, methods, results, and analysis. These sections will focus on a specific aspect of the experiment and each aspect builds together the overall idea that is being put forth by the writer. Here is an outline of what each section needs to include:

Introduction: The purpose of this section is to inform the reader what exactly the experiment is, what will be used within the experiment, and an explanation of the concepts that are in play throughout the experiment. In general, this section forms the concepts and outline of the experiment so that the audience knows what is happening and what will be happening. This is also where ones hypothesis goes.

Methods: The purpose of this section is to persuade the reader that the the instrument that you chose to test the hypothesis is acceptable. For example, if one is testing bird population an unacceptable method would be to count bird droppings. Birds do not drop once and therefore one would have incorrect results. Also, one must explain, in detail, what exactly you are going to do in the experiment. This should be a step by step instruction so that someone can read your methods and re-created your experiment.

Results: This section is a tabulation of the results. Most likely tables, graphs...etc would be used. There is no analysis in this section or no explanation of the tables and graphs, just simply the raw data acquired during the experiment. Observations and information gained also goes in this section.

Analysis: This is most likely the largest section. This section interprets the results and how the results prove or disprove your hypothesis. Also, explain why or why not the results are that way and how the experiment could have error. Most importantly, how would you change the common beliefs about the subject of the experiment by the results obtained. This means if people commonly think one way, how does your experiment confirm or deny this thought and elaborate on how this conclusion came to be.

Each of these sections stands by itself. Do not put any analysis into the results or start describing how you are going to perform the experiment in the introduction. The description of the experiment belongs in the methods section.

Examples from my own experiment:

My own experiment sought to find out why a computer program called Second Life is so attracting to people. In the program one can create ones own avatar and lead a life of ones choosing. My argument focused an article written by Postman that states how people are naturally drawn to ever more increasing functions of technology and that will lead to a society ruled by technology called a technopoly. Postman argues that there are technopolies alive today and my experiment sought to find out why. My hypothesis for this experiment was:

“When a game becomes more appealing then real life itself, then the person may find them self not participating in real society but instead in Second Life only. As evidence of Postman’s technocracy, Second Life creates a world where the people live the lives they want to live in the game instead of in real life. The people who use and live in Second Life want a change in their life but do not go searching for that change in the real world, but in Second Life, because it is easier”

The last sentence is the solid thesis but it must be explained thoroughly to cover the larger picture. From here I developed how I would test my hypothesis in Second Life and conversed with other avatars in that world to get a feeling about why they used Second Life. The responses were recorded in the results section and my analysis found that not all people are addicted to the technology. This is a new discovery for Postman’s argument and therefore a contribution to the argument. This is the purpose of this type of argument. Where one finds new evidence that modifies the original argument to make a new contribution.

Your Assignment:

An assignment to test out this mode of argument is to determine why so many people text and drive. There will be many articles about this topic so pick two that make an assertion. From those assertions follow the same process outlined in this presentation. That is to create a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, and determine what your results mean. Questions like why people do it, why it is so appealing, and why it is a new development in driving safety...etc. These will lead you to an original argument. This process is what one must follow when making an argument via hypothesis.