When I first started this chapter, I enjoyed reading through the anecdotal introduction. I thought that as the speaker defended their reputation as a sociologist and supported their believability through their previous accomplishments, he left the audience lost as they did not have enough background information necessary at that moment. I thought that this relation to the “they say” argument was very captivating and effective, as it puts you in the perspective of the reader who is reading along to an article with a lost objective. It truly underlines the importance of making what you have to say to introduce a train of thought clear, before then establishing upon that specific topic. On the contrary, however, when I got to the point where the book introduces some “conventional ways we think about a topic” on pages 23-24, I disagreed with a couple: “Conventional wisdom has it that…” and especially “Common sense seems to dictate that…” As a reader who may come across some of these openings, I openly admit that these come off with degradation. These types of topic sentences come off negatively, as they may disagree with one of the ideas from the authors utilizing these sentences. Therefore, by the author’s definition, these readers would exhibit no common sense. I believe that no matter the opinion– whether perceived as right or wrong, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. On a lighter note, however, I enjoyed the last section of the chapter when the book suggests keeping what “they say” in view throughout the entirety of your paper. I think that this is a very important move, as you most definitely don’t want to lose sight of the point you propel your thoughts from. The goal of this strategy is to smoothly relay your thoughts conscientiously and not leave your audience grasping for straws at your foundation.