I have a question and I would appreciate an answer

[Zander]

My mom has been telling me this for a long time but today I got really annoyed about this.

 

Question

When you speak or write a statement, do you give the conclusion first and reasoning after or do you first provide all the reasoning and then end it with a conclusion?

 

Example

Q) Is blood donation for money ethically correct?

 

Answer 1

Blood donation for money is ethically correct, when the corruption is removed from the process.

Answer 2

When corruption is removed from the process, blood donation for money is ethically correct.

 

When I was discussing this with my mom, I said Answer 1 and before I could complete she interrupted me. Only after 3 mins she fully listened to my statement. 

Then she says that what I said was the wrong way of saying it because human minds are wired to first know the reason and then the conclusion.

She also said that if I ever said Answer 1 to anyone else, even in an exam, the listener/corrector would simply ignore my answer because it sounded wrong.

 

So can someone tell me if that is the case? I find it very weird and it's been bugging me a lot so I would appreciate an answer. Thanks

[HongaarseBeer]

It makes sense for people to immediately interrupt you if you start off with a conclusion or point of view that completely contradicts theirs. This happens a lot when I'm trying to convince my family by means of facts. My method of argumentation is usually like Answer 1.

 

Since it opposes someone, he/she is likely to interrupt your argumentation because they just think that what you are saying (or will say in the rest of the argumentation) makes no sense. Because in their eyes, your conclusion makes no sense. So how could there possibly be structured arguments to back the conclusion?

 

Now, this is only from my experience and I don't know if my experience represents the majority

[FairFamily]

Well I think it is best to first give your conclusion and then give an explanation.  Remember you have to drag a person into your opinion. So if you first give an explanation , they don't know what you're trying to say. It is a problem, I had as well when writing my thesis. The issue is that for you it makes sense where the argument is going but for others it will confuse and bore them. The conclusion is like a guide for your argumentation.

[Anti_Hero]

I think both are correct. But in case fo the first one, since the conclusion comes first some people may not listen to the rest.

In your exams it doesnt really matter but its normally prefered the first one, since most teachers/professors only look at the solution/conclusion and then to the reason. 

Some questions are also formed like this:

 Is blood donation for money ethically correct? Why?

 

In case of this example you said, its a simple yes or no question, not asking for a reason, you only give it to justify your point of view but wasnt required in the question, so the conclusion would be enough and i see no reason to make an exact order. if the question would be, "Explain your view on people getting paid to donate blood and if it is ethically correct." in this case I would prefer putting the conclusion last.

 

[Alistair]

Although I think any respectful person would listen to your whole sentence before deciding whether they agree or not, in which case the order doesn't really matter, I would say I rather agree with your Mom.

 

When you write an answer it doesn't matter as much, you can even give your conclusion first then develop the reasoning behind it for bonus 'style' point =p

 

When you're talking to someone however, it makes more sense to reason first and give your answer after, both from a cognitive and logical perspective.

[Zander]

38 minutes ago, HongaarseBeer said:

It makes sense for people to immediately interrupt you if you start off with a conclusion or point of view that completely contradicts theirs. This happens a lot when I'm trying to convince my family by means of facts. My method of argumentation is usually like Answer 1.

Yeah I guess it does make sense like that. I'm glad, I'm not the only one who answers like this.

19 minutes ago, FairFamily said:

Remember you have to drag a person into your opinion. So if you first give an explanation , they don't know what you're trying to say.

That is the exact reasoning I use to answer like this because even I would get bored if someone started simply telling reasons for a answer without me knowing the context at all.

 

19 minutes ago, Anti_Hero said:

In your exams it doesnt really matter but its normally prefered the first one, since most teachers/professors only look at the solution/conclusion and then to the reason. 

Yeah, especially in true/false questions with reasons they will always look for first correct or incorrect and then the answer. But in general questions where you have to provide your opinion, I get confused though I am learning to write properly in those.

 

22 minutes ago, Anti_Hero said:

"Explain your view on people getting paid to donate blood and if it is ethically correct." in this case I would prefer putting the conclusion last.

Why would you put the conclusion last? Is it because, it's asked last in the question or is that just a general answering order?

 

22 minutes ago, Alistair said:

When you're talking to someone however, it makes more sense to reason first and give your answer after, both from a cognitive and logical perspective.

Well sure if both parties are arguing about one thing then it might make sense but I still tend to get confused if someone simply starts with reasons. Plus stating the conclusion first kinda gives a concluding effect that this is my final opinion. At least that's what I think.

[Anti_Hero]

Since the example said explain your view I would go from broad to specific and end in the conclusion, to organize ideas. I dont think its an obligation, just that it seems better to me.

[Corso]

I don't think there's a definitive or logical answer, it mostly depends on various factors; I'll try to list the ones that come to my mind:

• the argument: if it's something difficult I think it's better to state your opinion at the beginning; for example, a theorem is always explained (at least in my books) following the order hypothesis > thesis > demonstration, otherwise the student might get lost because he doesn't know the destination of the logical path;
• the quantity of arguments: especially if you're talking, if you start your speech from the arguments the other might want to respond to each of your argument, and you might lose the thread;
• your style: if you expose your thesis in terse statements, then I think you can start from the arguments; if you're like me and love to write/say long and complicated sentences (especially with a refined style), then you should state your thesis first, so that the other knows what are you getting at (this is also the reason why this post is taking me so long);
• your task: is it to persuade someone? Then start from the thesis. Is it to prove you know something thoroughly (at school,...)? Then build your speech from the basis, but be ready to state the answer if you get stuck while exposing your line of reasoning;
• your istinct: it's up to the other to listen politely and ask if they didn't get something. Speak however you prefer.

Notice how I just used "method 1" (which is my favourite when writing); if you read this wall of text, I did a good job I also wanted to use the "bulleted list"

[Anti_Hero]

Just a little something. You can also see how people responded rather than the content