Good and Bad Writing.

BAD WRITING

Exhibit A: Paragraph Number One

This piece is presumably written by an non existing entity. The author begins: "Within our society, it has been shown that there is an individual." Based upon this statement alone, the author would have us believe that there is only one individual within 'this' society. Which society? This society. The author does not specify which society the paragraph is relative to and we are left to guess armed only with strange, incoherent sentences of rambling thoughts that follow. The second sentence is even less coherent. The author refers to the individual as "He" and then five words later refers to the same individual as "their." The third sentence contradicts the opening statement. The author suggests that the individual is either brainwashed by the media, or molded by their friends. If "their" friends are in fact trying to "direct us in the right direction" are the friends then unaffected by this apparent brainwashing? The author is now referring to the individual as "us." The author is undecided as to who the individual is - he has now pulled the reader into this confusion. The fifth sentence enlightens us to the fact that, "no one may ever know what is right or wrong." This statement has come out of nowhere. It is seemingly an anachronism to short cut through any explanation as to how they came to this conclusion. Then, they go on to surprise us with the introduction of ethical relativism which remains unexplained and the definition and origins of ethical relativism are actually questioned by the author. Apparently the author is not asking a rhetorical question - they too seem to be looking for the answers. The next sentence is completely unnecessary for it is so horrifyingly obvious a statement. I am amused by the following sentence which vaguely defines ethical relativism indirectly with improper usage of grammar and confusing language. The author thinks that they have avoided using a truism in the ninth sentence by stating "one may conclude" when addressing the diverse nature of humanity but they have not. It is just made to be a more confusing truism. There are no facts to support their claim besides experience and due to the previous content of this essay, one may question if there is even more than one society. I do not understand the conclusion of this paragraph in the least. I do not know how the author convicts both ethical relativists and philosophers of wasting their time. Nor do I comprehend what the author is stating! They do not explain their deductions; they assume we understand and have all along. I must say, I am impressed with this authors ability to talk in circles and jump from topic to topic. It is a most bewildering paragraph which contains no fact, no support and no sense. It has too many directions and no purpose.

Exhibit B: Paragraph Number Two

A paragraph has no right to be one sentence in length. The author is clearly unaware of the lung capacity of a human. The author is trying to be overly clever with the usage of 'big words.' It is an ironic intention, for the author becomes silly and pretentious in doing so. Quantity over quality is this authors motto.

Exhibit C: Paragraph Number Three

This paragraph supplies no solid fact or references so how is it they come up with such a sure conclusion? This paragraph is a wonderful explanation of a truism. If there is no support of an opinion it can only ever be speculation and opinion. If one tries to force an opinion with aggressive 'logic' then this thought becomes a lie.

Good Writing

Exhibit A: Paragraph Number Four

This paragraph is reliable, coherent, direct and accurate. It has support and is well delivered. It captures the reader with fascinating imagery and does not use more words than it must.

Exhibit B: Paragraph Number Five

The author possesses the readers interest with a beautiful quote from a Leigh Hunt the poet. "colours are the smiles of nature." Artfully, they proceed to refer to colours as smiles. They then go on to explain the science of this statement with appropriate referencing. This paragraph has definite direction and a nice style that evokes a lovely thought in the audience.

Exhibit C: Paragraph Number Six

This paragraph is especially 'good.' It asks seemingly obvious questions to aid their thesis. It clearly defines what a machine is, and it is a broad enough definition to prove their point. It proceeds to raise an interesting possibility that cannot be disproved about future machinery. This paragraph then sets up the following paragraph nicely with a question that concludes the previous thought. It is a valid paragraph as it has scientific backing. It asks the reader to think and to question yet rigs the questions to lead the reader to a clear agreement.

Slurred thoughts, wordy phrases, lack of evidence, lack of interest, and most importantly no direction make bad writing.

Clear concise reasoning, valid evidence, references, rhetorical devices, definite direction, make up good writing.