Seven Words To Make Your Content Flow Like an Ironclad Argument
The connective tissue of a truly persuasive piece
All great content marketing is an argument — even it’s not directly selling anything.
There has to be a ‘point’ to the piece, and that point has to be justified.
You can’t just make a series of blanket claims; you have to show the audience why your right.
But content that feels like an argument turns people off.
They feel sold to, like the only reason you’re creating is to get something from them.
So the best creators learn to conceal their argument in compelling content.
They use stories to move people.
They use humour to entertain them.
The result is content that not only stops thumbs and earns likes — it actually produces the intended output.
That could be shifting a product; it could be building authority.
What matters isn’t the goal of the argument — it’s that the argument has an ironclad structure.
And in this article, I’m going to teach you how to create one.
Why most creators don’t make arguments
The reason so much content fails to make a compelling argument is simple:
Most content writers learn by imitation.
They see great writers using stories or humour — and assume that’s the essence of good content.
But even if they do manage to replicate those surface qualities, they miss the content’s underlying structure — because that argumentative scaffolding is hidden by design.
The best creators learn to conceal their argument in compelling content.
Instead of trying to mimic the style of successful content, most creators would be better off studying its underlying structure.
Your content could be amazing.
But if it doesn’t make the right argument, it won’t achieve your goal.
Yet even the most average content imaginable, if properly structured, is more likely to produce results — because it’s actually pointing the audience in the right direction.
Problem is, there’s far greater demand for advice about snappy hooks than boring structures.
Which means the deeper structures of persuasive content are rarely described.
And the average content writer has to discover them for themselves — having wasted potentially years producing content which is great at everything except achieving its purpose.
That’s why I’ve put together this simple system to give your content a solid argumentative foundation.
It consists of seven simple words that orientate your argument:
Problem, Can’t, Instead, But, Therefore, By, and To.
But before I explain how it works, you’re probably wondering:
Is this really any different from other marketing models you hear about — like AIDA or the ‘problem-solution’ format?
Most marketing frameworks focus on emotion, not logic
‘Problem-Solution’ is not really an argumentative structure.
An argument is the reasoning that gets us from the problem to the solution.
Similarly, AIDA (Attention, Interest, Desire, Action) is a framework for behavioural outcomes — it doesn’t tell you how to achieve those outcomes.
And the hero’s journey – the basis for Storybrand’s framework – is about creating narrative, not reasoning.
All of which is fine, but it doesn’t give us a proper argument.
Argument is not about emotion; it’s about logic.
The reason most frameworks don’t suffice as argument comes down to marketers’ obsession with emotion.
We think — correctly — that emotion is a key action driver.
So most models are geared towards the audience’s emotions — as if they were purely emotional beings.
The reason most frameworks don’t suffice as argument comes down to marketers’ obsession with emotion.
But let’s be clear: humans are not exclusively irrational.
We want to be moved, yes.
And we certainly make some weird decisions.
But the average person isn’t persuaded by emotion alone.
They need at least the foundations of a solid argument.
And that requires more than pointing to a problem and offering your solution in a compelling way.
A proper argument does several important things:
- It takes into account other possible solutions (to build credibility)
- It takes seriously possible problems with your conclusion (to preempt concerns)
- It moves logically from a starting point to a persuasive conclusion (to point the audience in the right direction)
Of course, plenty of models do one (or even two) of these things.
I’ve seen solid messaging frameworks that have a logic structure, or preempt the buyer’s concerns.
But doing all of these things simultaneously — and succinctly — requires a solid argumentative framework — which which is exactly what the Seven Word Argument Architecture provides.
The Seven Word Argument Architecture
Here is the framework in its basic form:
Problem | The situation as it stands
Can’t | An obvious (or popular) solution just doesn’t cut it
Instead | Here is a better alternative
But | Doing that isn’t so easy
Therefore | You need to do this
By | Using this approach/product/solution
To | See these benefits
Of course, you don’t need to use these exact words.
They serve as an anchor point.
When you are working on a piece of content, try writing them in the margin — and see whether your article (or script, or paragraph) fit the flow.
If they do, there’s a very high probability your piece has a persuasive argumentative drive — even if it doesn’t read like an argument.
The model can also help you clarify and substantiate your premise.
Because placing an insight into this structure will quickly reveal its weaknesses.
It’ll help you locate leaps in logic, or where you need to support your claim more.
And it will help you make the case for it as effectively as possible.
But that’s all very abstract.
It makes the model seems too abstract, or maybe even restrictive.
Fortunately, we needn’t go far to find a concrete example of the model in action.
Because I used it to write the opening of this very article:
Now, is this the greatest piece of content in the world?
You’ll be the judge.
(No, it’s not)
But it does make a proper argument.
It take my basic claim — that great content marketing should have a hidden argumentative structure — and it backs that claim up rationally.
There is a logical flow, where alternative approaches (making blanket statements) and potential roadblocks (content shouldn’t feel like an argument) are addressed.
And while the premise is clearly somewhat of an overgeneralisation, it develops the claim effectively enough that you at least sort of believe it’s true.
Most importantly, the framework leaves plenty of room for creativity — and emotion.
I could have extended any of these sub-sections with an anecdote, or a joke, or a stat — whatever best served my purposes.
And that’s the real benefit:
A clear argumentative structure doesn’t make your content dry or lifeless — it frees you to be as creative as you like around those basic parameters.
It turns your content into modules you can expand or contract at will — making it easier to write and more fun to play with.
And it does all that without ever losing sight of the point.
Final thoughts: every structure needs cement
There is, of course, an eighth word you need for a truly persuasive argument:
Why.
The most impactful content writers have that word in mind at all times.
Every idea is scrutinised, every claim challenged.
And even if it’s not explicit, every phase of the argument architecture I’ve described should be followed by ‘why?’
Because Why is the cement that holds an argument together.
And a ‘why’ is ultimately what persuasive content must give its audience.
