Supporting what I support

Dear freshperson,

I have read the draft of your so-called persuasive essay and I am a bit befuddled. You show evidence of having done at least a modicum of research on your topic, and your thesis suggests that you will take some sort of stand on the topic although it fails to specify the exact nature of that stand. But after reading six pages of "on the one hand this and on the other hand that," I was really hoping that at some point you would raise one of those hands and provide an answer. Instead, you give me this: "Most of the time people will support the study they personally support."

I am willing to admit the truth of this statement. It is undeniable that people support what people support. However, this assignment asked a specific person (you) to support a specific thesis (proposing change) to persuade specific readers (in a position to act on your proposal) to take some specific action (change the world!). Your paper fails in every respect.

Here is my question: if, after carefully researching your topic, you are unable to come to any conclusion about the matter, why write about it? And if you can't be bothered to actually say something about the topic, why should anyone read your paper? If all you can do is throw your hands in the air and say "People will do what people will do," then what's the point of writing at all?

True, people support what people support--and after reading your draft, I support the idea that you need to take a stand on the topic. But students will do what students will do and there's not much I can say to change that.