First: In your intro paragraph you must absolutely state clearly the position you are going
to defend. This is your thesis statement. You also want to say how you will argue for that
thesis statement, so be sure to state what your primary argument is going to be. State
briefly the major objection to your position you will be responding to. State briefly how
you will defend your view against that objection.
Second: Motivate the reader to be interested in this particular question or this particular
debate. For example, you could point out real-life policy questions that your topic is
directly relevant too. You could show how work related to your topic would be useful in
addressing other pressing moral or political questions. In whatever way you do it, you
want the reader to understand why any normal, rational, curious, and thoughtful person
should find a good paper on this topic worth reading.
Third: Carefully explain your argument. Walk the reader through all its parts and the
evidence/considerations/premises on which it relies. Be sure to motivate your argument—
i.e. explain why one should find your argument compelling. For example, perhaps your
argument benefits from not having to rely on controversial views about personhood.
Perhaps your argument takes a very popular argument and improves upon it (be sure to
state how it is an improvement). Perhaps your argument benefits from being novel—
maybe it takes into account things that other arguments have omitted.
Fourth: Carefully explain what you take to be the best objection to your argument.
Perhaps it is objection to one of the premises or consideration upon which your argument
relies. Perhaps it is an objection that your argument has ignored, or failed to do justice
to, the rights of mothers, or the rights of fetuses. Motivate that objection—explain why
someone would find that objection to be a compelling problem for your argument.
Fifth: Carefully respond to the objection to your argument. This usually looks like either
undermining the objection itself (e.g., challenging one of its premises), or, explaining how
your argument could be changed to avoid or accommodate that objection. Perhaps the
objection is that your argument ignores the possibility that potential persons have rights,
and you explain how your argument works whether potential persons have rights or not.
Finally: In a concluding paragraph or two, walk the reader back through what you have
done in the paper. In many ways this is a rehash of your introduction. But unlike your
introduction, which is essentially a road map for what is to come, your conclusion can
include some commentary on the journey. You can reemphasize important points. You
can make suggestive remarks on what further questions have been raised by your
discussion, etc. Don’t go overboard. You still want to keep everything nice and tight.