Le 1

HW3: Arguing with Smith

1. Distill Smith’s main argument or question into 3 sentences.
Smith succinctly outlines the evolution and history of the definitions and perceptions of
religion and the study of it. He does so to address how, ultimately, religion is not an
intrinsic term of the world, but a secondary term derived for scholars. Although many
may protest and abandon the study of religion at the notion, he insists that the division in
definition and its cause is the very object of the study.

2. If you had to describe this article to a friend, what would be essential for them to
know?
There is value behind having the contextual knowledge and applicable understanding of a
discipline, in this case religion. Sometimes it can offer us insight into how people’s
opinions are influenced and evolve. In other words, it teaches us the theory of knowledge.

3. What would you argue is Smith’s motivation for writing it. Consider contextual
clues as well as what he was written in the essay.
From reading Smith’s other essay, “Playful Acts of Imagination”, we can reasonably
conclude that he believes it is important, especially from an academic point of view, to
consider things from different perspectives, and in order to do so, we must first
understand the context. Therefore, Smith may have applied this philosophy towards the
study and definition of religion.

4. Identify the 5 parts of an argument that Booth, et al.

The five parts of an argument are claim, reasons, evidence, acknowledgement and
response, and warrant. It is important to note that they are not necessarily used in
sequential order.
a. Claim: The purpose of every research paper is to investigate your claim – a
solution to a problem addressed in the early stages. It is also possible to have sub-
claims that support your decisions to use certain evidence and such.
b. Reasons: By stating your reasons behind a claim, you give your reader cause to
accept it. The link between your reason and your claim is often more intuitive.
c. Evidence: Evidence is usually secondary statements or information that supports
your claim and reasons. It is often useful for the logic of your argument to explain
your decision to include the evidence and how it links to your reasoning or claim.
d. Acknowledgement and Response: Readers can bring up counter arguments to
your claims or reasoning; therefore, to provide a sounder argument, it is important
to anticipate these counter arguments, acknowledge them, and provide responses
to dispute them to a reasonable extent. By acknowledging and responding
appropriately to readers’ counter arguments, you encourage them to consider your
argument. However, it is difficult to anticipate their arguments.
 Le 2

e. Warrant: Warrants explain the relevance of your reasons and evidence to your
claim by claiming that if a generalization is true, the specific instances of it must
also be true.

5. Outline and write out Smith’s main argument, broken down by their 5 categories.
Smith’s argument can be broken down into these 5 categories.
a. Claim: There is no real definition of religion, it is merely a term created by
scholars and is theirs to define. Although there is no true definition, that does not
mean it is a hopeless task in studying it, rather it gives us more rein to explore and
investigate its evolution.
b. Reasons: Distillation of the historical evolution of religion.
c. Evidence: Accounts of philosophers, explorers, historians and their backgrounds,
which gives contextual reasons behind their statements.
d. Acknowledgement and Response: Some try to pigeon hole and categories
religion. However, the derivation of some religions is intrinsically with many
others, so if you include one, you must include others and so and on and so forth.
e. Warrant: Some of Smith’s evidence demonstrate how many disagree on the
importance, definition, origins and truth of different religions. Therefore, if even a
few people disagree on a specific definition, how can there be a correct one as
some religions state?