What I do with them is explain the difference between an hypothesis and a theory. An hypothesis is a generalized assumption made about a given set of reliable data that one seeks to prove (or dis-prove the null hypothesis). A theory is a proven hypothesis or set of hypotheses rooted in predictable statements about patterns in data presented.

This is useful language to bring into a conversation about rhetorical strategy in crafting an argument since it clearly reveals where an argument in convincing versus where an argument in fallacious. I get into debates of this sort all the time with atheists in their hook line and sinker appraisals of Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris who present loads of fallacies that offer more noisy rhetoric than substantiated arguments.

Thanks to AKMA for linking to this post!

I’ve directed my students in ST511: Orientation to Theological Studies to this post. I hope it might spike your traffic a little and also give them something to chew on as they work toward their term papers.

I think Thompson might allow for moments where you mention the opinion of scholars and where they make their arguments, as long as you realize that this is not in itself evidentiary support. I suppose it is like saying: “These scholars argue thus. If we assume these scholars to be correct, let’s wrestle with some implication of that assumption.”

In the example about the Johannine community that I cite, the article went on to make an argument suggesting that the Gospel is an etiology of said community, as they were projecting their beliefs and socially sectarian situation back upon Jesus’ life. That there is a Johannine community is a foundational assumption for his argument. I think it would have been helpful if he would have at least spelled out what the arguments are for this community (even if he does not give a full-fledged argument himself).

“One cannot support every single assertion in a paper, of course.”

No, but instead of saying “it has become abundantly clear that…” you can say “many scholars agree that…” and footnote a number of those who do. I assume this is different to her point about the majority view, because you are demonstrating both that this is true and who it is who agrees.