The Japanese opinion essay (意見文 / 小論文) has a shape and a voice that surprise English writers on both counts. Its shape is a tight logical circuit — thesis, concession, reason, restatement — bolted together with explicit connectives. Its voice is deliberately impersonal: where an English essayist writes "I think" and "I believe," a Japanese one hides the author behind hedges like 〜と考えられる ("it can be thought") and rhetorical questions like 〜のではないだろうか ("is it not the case that…?"). And the whole thing is written in である体, the plain-but-formal register that bans です・ます. This page reads a short excerpt argument line by line — on what smartphones give us and what they cost.
The excerpt:
近年、私たちはあらゆる情報を瞬時に手に入れられるようになった。確かに、これは大きな進歩である。しかし、その一方で、失われたものも少なくないのではないだろうか。なぜなら、情報が多すぎると、かえって物事を深く考えなくなるからである。便利さと引き換えに、思考力が失われつつあると考えられる。とはいえ、技術そのものを否定すべきではない。したがって、重要なのは、道具にどう向き合うかということなのである。便利さに流されるのではなく、立ち止まって考える姿勢こそ、今、求められているのではないだろうか。
The opening: setting the scene in である
近年、私たちはあらゆる情報を瞬時に手に入れられるようになった。
kinnen, watashitachi wa arayuru jōhō o shunji ni te ni irerareru yō ni natta
In recent years, we have become able to obtain any information instantly.
The essay opens by establishing common ground in the plain past. あらゆる ("every / all kinds of") and 瞬時に ("in an instant") are written-register vocabulary; 手に入れられるようになった ("came to be able to obtain") states a social change neutrally. Nothing here is polite — no です, no ます — yet it is highly formal, because である体 is formal precisely by being impersonal, an axis that trips up English speakers and is unpacked on である体, the formal written register.
The concession: 確かに … である
確かに、これは大きな進歩である。
tashika ni, kore wa ōkina shinpo de aru
Certainly, this is great progress.
確かに ("certainly / it's true that") opens the concession — the essayist first grants the opposing view its due. And the copula is である, not です — the defining marker of the register. である is the formal-written "is," covered on である, the written copula. A 確かに sentence always sets up a しかし to come; a Japanese reader hears 確かに and expects the pivot.
The pivot: しかし … のではないだろうか
しかし、その一方で、失われたものも少なくないのではないだろうか。
shikashi, sono ippō de, ushinawareta mono mo sukunakunai no de wa nai darō ka
But at the same time, is it not the case that much has also been lost?
しかし ("however") delivers the counter the 確かに promised, and その一方で ("on the other hand") reinforces the turn. Then comes the essay's signature move: 〜のではないだろうか. Literally "is it not the case that…?", it is a rhetorical question that softens an assertion. The writer clearly believes much has been lost — but rather than declaring it flatly (失われたものも多い), they float it as a question the reader is invited to answer for themselves. This is more persuasive and more modest than a bald claim: it looks like open inquiry while steering the reader to the intended conclusion. Note also the passive 失われた ("was lost"), which keeps the agent invisible — impersonality again.
The reason: なぜなら … からである
なぜなら、情報が多すぎると、かえって物事を深く考えなくなるからである。
nazenara, jōhō ga ōsugiru to, kaette monogoto o fukaku kangaenaku naru kara de aru
This is because, when there is too much information, we conversely stop thinking about things deeply.
なぜなら … からである is the formal reason-frame — "the reason is that … " with なぜなら at the front announcing an explanation and からである closing it. It is the written-register equivalent of なぜかというと…からです. かえって ("on the contrary / rather") is a favourite essay adverb, flagging a counter-intuitive result: more information leading to less thinking. The 〜と here is the conditional "when/if," and the whole clause states a general truth, not a personal experience.
The impersonal hedge: 〜と考えられる
便利さと引き換えに、思考力が失われつつあると考えられる。
benrisa to hikikae ni, shikōryoku ga ushinaware tsutsu aru to kangaerareru
It can be thought that, in exchange for convenience, our capacity for thought is being lost.
This sentence shows the register's most important stylistic reflex. An English essayist writes "I think our capacity for thought is being lost." A Japanese essayist writes 〜と考えられる — the passive/potential of 考える, "it can be thought / one may consider that." The author disappears; the conclusion appears to arise from the evidence itself. Saying 私はそう思う ("I think so") in a formal essay reads as naïve and subjective — authority here comes from detachment, so you reach for impersonal hedges: 〜と考えられる, 〜と思われる ("it seems"), 〜と言える ("it can be said"). 〜つつある ("is in the process of —ing") is itself a formal, literary "gradually becoming."
The counter-concession: とはいえ … べきではない
とはいえ、技術そのものを否定すべきではない。
to wa ie, gijutsu sono mono o hitei subeki de wa nai
That said, we should not reject the technology itself.
とはいえ ("that said / even so") makes a second turn — the essayist qualifies their own criticism so as not to overstate it, a mark of balanced argument. 〜べきではない ("should not / ought not") is the formal stance-marker for what one shouldn't do (its positive twin is 〜べきである, "ought to"). そのもの ("itself / the very thing") sharpens the point: it's not technology as such that's the problem.
The restatement: したがって … のである
したがって、重要なのは、道具にどう向き合うかということなのである。
shitagatte, jūyō na no wa, dōgu ni dō mukiau ka to iu koto na no de aru
Therefore, what matters is how we choose to engage with our tools.
したがって ("therefore / consequently") is the formal logical connective that introduces the conclusion drawn from everything above — stiffer and more argumentative than だから. The sentence ends on 〜のである (here なのである after a noun phrase), which presents the conclusion as a settled, established point — the written register's emphatic "this, then, is the crux." 重要なのは…ということだ ("what is important is that…") is a stock framing device for delivering a thesis. See how わけ marks such reasoning on わけだ／わけではない.
The close: back to the rhetorical question
便利さに流されるのではなく、立ち止まって考える姿勢こそ、今、求められているのではないだろうか。
benrisa ni nagasareru no de wa naku, tachidomatte kangaeru shisei koso, ima, motomerarete iru no de wa nai darō ka
Rather than being swept along by convenience, is it not precisely an attitude of pausing to think that is now called for?
The essay closes by returning to 〜のではないだろうか, framing its final call to the reader as a question rather than a command. 〜のではなく ("not …, but rather") sets up the contrast; こそ emphatically singles out 姿勢 ("attitude") as the thing that matters; and the passive 求められている ("is being called for") once more keeps the demand impersonal — society calls for it, not the author. The circle closes: concession, counter, reason, hedge, qualification, conclusion, and a final rhetorical question that hands the reader the intended answer.
Common mistakes
Writing the essay in です・ます. Polite forms belong to speech and letters. An academic essay is である体 throughout; a single です marks it as a school composition, not formal argument.
❌ これは大きな進歩です。でも、失われたものも多いと思います。
です・ます and personal 思います — reads as spoken/casual, wrong register for an essay.
✅ これは大きな進歩である。しかし、失われたものも少なくないのではないだろうか。
kore wa ōkina shinpo de aru. shikashi, ushinawareta mono mo sukunakunai no de wa nai darō ka
This is great progress. But is it not the case that much has also been lost?
Over-asserting where the register wants a hedge. Flat declarations of personal opinion read as naïve; convert them to impersonal 〜と考えられる.
❌ 私は、思考力が失われていると強く思う。
Subjective and blunt — 私は…と強く思う foregrounds the author, which formal Japanese avoids.
✅ 思考力が失われつつあると考えられる。
shikōryoku ga ushinaware tsutsu aru to kangaerareru
It can be thought that our capacity for thought is being lost.
Dropping 確かに before しかし. Skipping the concession makes the argument look one-sided; the 確かに…しかし pair is what signals balanced reasoning.
❌ しかし、失われたものも大きい。
A しかし with nothing conceded before it has nothing to pivot from — the counter feels abrupt and unearned.
✅ 確かに便利になった。しかし、失われたものも大きいのではないだろうか。
tashika ni benri ni natta. shikashi, ushinawareta mono mo ōkii no de wa nai darō ka
Certainly it has become convenient. But is it not the case that much has also been lost?
Reading のではないだろうか as a real question. It is a rhetorical device that softens an assertion, not a request for information — the writer already knows the answer they want.
❌ 失われたものは何だろうか。
Misreads the device — 〜のではないだろうか is not asking 'what was lost?'; it is asserting 'surely much was lost' in question form.
✅ 失われたものも少なくないのではないだろうか。
ushinawareta mono mo sukunakunai no de wa nai darō ka
Is it not the case that much has also been lost?
Key takeaways
- The opinion essay runs a tight logical circuit — concession → counter → reason → hedge → qualification → conclusion → rhetorical close — welded together with explicit connectives (確かに, しかし, なぜなら…からである, とはいえ, したがって).
- It is written in である体: plain forms, the copula である, and no です・ます.
- The voice is impersonal. Replace 私は…と思う with hedges — 〜と考えられる, 〜と思われる, 〜と言える — so the conclusion seems to arise from the evidence, not the author.
- 〜のではないだろうか is a rhetorical question that softens an assertion into an invitation — persuasive and modest; it is not a genuine question.
- 確かに…しかし is the core concede-then-counter rhythm; 〜べきである／べきではない carries stance, したがって…のである delivers the settled conclusion.
Now practice Japanese
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Japanese→Related Topics
- ニュースの見出しとリード: A News Headline and LeadN2 — How to read a Japanese newspaper headline and its opening paragraph — the compressed, particle-dropping 見出し and the impersonal である／だ lead with its attribution markers (によると, という, とみられる) that separate reported fact from confirmed fact.
- 面接の自己PR: A Job-Interview Self-PitchN2 — A polished job-interview 自己PR annotated line by line — how Japanese hiring rewards a strength stated plainly but wrapped in humble keigo, proven by a concrete episode, and pointed at the employer.
- 〜わけだ / 〜わけではない / 〜わけがない: Logical ConsequenceN2 — The わけ family names the reasoning behind a situation, then manipulates it four ways — asserting it (わけだ), narrowing it (わけではない), ruling it out (わけがない), and blocking an action (わけにはいかない).