That's not quite what I meant. I'm saying, start with the conclusion to the argument, then work backwards through the supporting evidence to the argument, and

That's not quite what I meant. I'm saying, start with the conclusion to the argument, then work backwards through the supporting evidence to the argument, and conclude by reviewing how the originally stated conclusion satisfies it. Can't think of a good example atm, but will try to find one and have it handy in case this topic ever comes up again.