How to build arguments
Of course, a spoken response involves spontaneity and stress. But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have a clear structure. Even improvisation — especially the kind we prepare for in advance — needs an internal logic.
❗For level B2 and above, the key skill is the automated ability to build an argument consistently: highlight the main thing, develop a thought, support your position not with one statement, but with a whole bunch, and be sure to illustrate your ideas with real-life examples.
A good argument is not just an opinion. There is always a clear chain inside it:
statement (what you think) → explanation (why you think so) → example (how it manifests itself in reality).
Without an example, the argument remains abstract and unproven.
⚠️Now about why I most often insist on three arguments. This is no coincidence.
1️⃣Firstly, there is a classical approach through dialectics - a triad that is associated with Hegel (if my memory serves me correctly): thesis, antithesis and synthesis. First we give a position for, then against, and then - the hardest part - we try to reconcile them or find a third way.
2️⃣Secondly, there is a more practical, “examination” approach - let's call it thematic. In it, you briefly mention the opposing point of view before arguing, and the arguments themselves are built solely in defense of your position.
✅Whichever path you choose - dialectical or thematic - the “magic of three” does not disappear anywhere:
📌one argument is an accident
📌two - a feeling of coincidence
📌three - already a system and a confident position
📎What happens in practice: although Western rhetoric is largely built on a dialectical approach (for / against / synthesis), at the B2 level you should not complicate your task. My personal observations have shown that an answer in which all three arguments support the same position sounds much easier and more convincing, and attempts to add antithesis and synthesis under exam conditions often lead to the opposite effect:
▪️or the speech becomes unbalanced: there are 2 sentences in defense, and 5 against them,
▪️or the speaker’s own opinion is not visible behind the theses and antitheses,
▪️or the respondent simply does not have time to formulate a clear “third way” = synthesis and the answer hangs in the air.
Therefore, I personally am for the optimal strategy - a clear and consistent defense of one position through several ⚠strong arguments.
And, of course, it is important to remember: the structure itself is only a frame. It needs to be “put on” with everything else that is required at the B2 level and above - grammar, connectives, vocabulary and naturalness of speech, which before the exam is often achieved exclusively through repeated repetitions of the same thing.
Read other articles:
A certificate is not a guarantee of peace of mind