refutation in an argumentative essay

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

A Guide to Rebuttals in Argumentative Essays

4-minute read

• 27th May 2023

Rebuttals are an essential part of a strong argument. But what are they, exactly, and how can you use them effectively? Read on to find out.

What Is a Rebuttal?

When writing an argumentative essay , there’s always an opposing point of view. You can’t present an argument without the possibility of someone disagreeing.

Sure, you could just focus on your argument and ignore the other perspective, but that weakens your essay. Coming up with possible alternative points of view, or counterarguments, and being prepared to address them, gives you an edge. A rebuttal is your response to these opposing viewpoints.

How Do Rebuttals Work?

With a rebuttal, you can take the fighting power away from any opposition to your idea before they have a chance to attack. For a rebuttal to work, it needs to follow the same formula as the other key points in your essay: it should be researched, developed, and presented with evidence.

Rebuttals in Action

Suppose you’re writing an essay arguing that strawberries are the best fruit. A potential counterargument could be that strawberries don’t work as well in baked goods as other berries do, as they can get soggy and lose some of their flavor. Your rebuttal would state this point and then explain why it’s not valid:

Read on for a few simple steps to formulating an effective rebuttal.

Step 1. Come up with a Counterargument

A strong rebuttal is only possible when there’s a strong counterargument. You may be convinced of your idea but try to place yourself on the other side. Rather than addressing weak opposing views that are easy to fend off, try to come up with the strongest claims that could be made.

In your essay, explain the counterargument and agree with it. That’s right, agree with it – to an extent. State why there’s some truth to it and validate the concerns it presents.

Step 2. Point Out Its Flaws

Now that you’ve presented a counterargument, poke holes in it . To do so, analyze the argument carefully and notice if there are any biases or caveats that weaken it. Looking at the claim that strawberries don’t work well in baked goods, a weakness could be that this argument only applies when strawberries are baked in a pie.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Step 3. Present New Points

Once you reveal the counterargument’s weakness, present a new perspective, and provide supporting evidence to show that your argument is still the correct one. This means providing new points that the opposer may not have considered when presenting their claim.

Offering new ideas that weaken a counterargument makes you come off as authoritative and informed, which will make your readers more likely to agree with you.

Summary: Rebuttals

Rebuttals are essential when presenting an argument. Even if a counterargument is stronger than your point, you can construct an effective rebuttal that stands a chance against it.

We hope this guide helps you to structure and format your argumentative essay . And once you’ve finished writing, send a copy to our expert editors. We’ll ensure perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, referencing, and more. Try it out for free today!

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a rebuttal in an essay.

A rebuttal is a response to a counterargument. It presents the potential counterclaim, discusses why it could be valid, and then explains why the original argument is still correct.

How do you form an effective rebuttal?

To use rebuttals effectively, come up with a strong counterclaim and respectfully point out its weaknesses. Then present new ideas that fill those gaps and strengthen your point.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Hill Street Studios/Getty Images

• An Introduction to Punctuation
• Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
• M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
• B.A., English, State University of New York

In rhetoric, refutation is the part of an argument in which a speaker or writer counters opposing points of view. Also called  confutation .

Refutation is "the key element in debate," say the authors of The Debater's Guide  (2011). Refutation "makes the whole process exciting by relating ideas and arguments from one team to those of the other" ( The Debater's Guide , 2011).

In speeches, refutation and confirmation are often presented "conjointly with one another" (in the words of the unknown author of Ad Herrenium ): support for a claim ( confirmation ) can be enhanced by a challenge to the validity of an opposing claim ( refutation ).

In classical rhetoric , refutation was one of the rhetorical exercises known as the  progymnasmata .

Examples and Observations

"Refutation is the part of an essay that disproves the opposing arguments. It is always necessary in a persuasive paper to refute or answer those arguments. A good method for formulating your refutation is to put yourself in the place of your readers, imagining what their objections might be. In the exploration of the issues connected with your subject, you may have encountered possible opposing viewpoints in discussions with classmates or friends. In the refutation, you refute those arguments by proving the opposing basic proposition untrue or showing the reasons to be invalid...In general, there is a question about whether the refutation should come before or after the proof . The arrangement will differ according to the particular subject and the number and strength of the opposing arguments. If the opposing arguments are strong and widely held, they should be answered at the beginning. In this case, the refutation becomes a large part of the proof . . .. At other times when the opposing arguments are weak, the refutation will play only a minor part in the overall proof." -Winifred Bryan Horner, Rhetoric in the Classical Tradition . St. Martin's, 1988

Indirect and Direct Refutation

• "Debaters refute through an indirect means when they use counter-argument to attack the case of an opponent. Counter-argument is the demonstration of such a high degree of probability for your conclusions that the opposing view loses its probability and is rejected... Direct refutation attacks the arguments of the opponent with no reference to the constructive development of an opposing view...The most effective refutation, as you can probably guess, is a combination of the two methods so that the strengths of the attack come from both the destruction of the opponents' views and the construction of an opposing view." -Jon M. Ericson, James J. Murphy, and Raymond Bud Zeuschner,  The Debater's Guide , 4th ed. Southern Illinois University Press, 2011
• "An effective refutation must speak directly to an opposing argument. Often writers or speakers will claim to be refuting the opposition, but rather than doing so directly, will simply make another argument supporting their own side. This is a form of the fallacy of irrelevance through evading the issue." -Donald Lazere,  Reading and Writing for Civic Literacy: The Critical Citizen's Guide to Argumentative Rhetoric . Taylor & Francis, 2009

Cicero on Confirmation and Refutation

"[T]he statement of the case . . . must clearly point out the question at issue. Then must be conjointly built up the great bulwarks of your cause, by fortifying your own position, and weakening that of your opponent; for there is only one effectual method of vindicating your own cause, and that includes both the confirmation and refutation. You cannot refute the opposite statements without establishing your own; nor can you, on the other hand, establish your own statements without refuting the opposite; their union is demanded by their nature, their object, and their mode of treatment. The whole speech is, in most cases, brought to a conclusion by some amplification of the different points, or by exciting or mollifying the judges; and every aid must be gathered from the preceding, but more especially from the concluding parts of the address, to act as powerfully as possible upon their minds, and make them zealous converts to your cause." -Cicero, De Oratore , 55 BC

Richard Whately on Refutation

"Refutation of Objections should generally be placed in the midst of the Argument; but nearer the beginning than the end. If indeed very strong objections have obtained much currency, or have been just stated by an opponent, so that what is asserted is likely to be regarded as paradoxical , it may be advisable to begin with a Refutation." -Richard Whately, Elements of Rhetoric , 1846)​

FCC Chairman William Kennard's Refutation

"There will be those who say 'Go slow. Don't upset the status quo.' No doubt we will hear this from competitors who perceive that they have an advantage today and want regulation to protect their advantage. Or we will hear from those who are behind in the race to compete and want to slow down deployment for their own self-interest. Or we will hear from those that just want to resist changing the status quo for no other reason than change brings less certainty than the status quo. They will resist change for that reason alone. So we may well hear from a whole chorus of naysayers. And to all of them, I have only one response: we cannot afford to wait. We cannot afford to let the homes and schools and businesses throughout America wait. Not when we have seen the future. We have seen what high capacity broadband can do for education and for our economy. We must act today to create an environment where all competitors have a fair shot at bringing high capacity bandwidth to consumers—especially residential consumers. And especially residential consumers in rural and underserved areas." -William Kennard, Chairman of the FCC, July 27, 1998

Etymology: From the Old English, "beat"

Pronunciation: REF-yoo-TAY-shun

• The Parts of a Speech in Classical Rhetoric
• Proof in Rhetoric
• Confirmation in Speech and Rhetoric
• Usage and Examples of a Rebuttal
• Arrangement in Composition and Rhetoric
• AP English Exam: 101 Key Terms
• What Is the Straw Man Fallacy?
• Rogerian Argument: Definition and Examples
• Reductio Ad Absurdum in Argument
• Conceding and Refuting in English
• What Does "Dissoi Logoi" Mean?
• 5 Steps to Writing a Position Paper
• What Is a Rhetorical Device? Definition, List, Examples
• Oration (Classical Rhetoric)
• Elenchus (argumentation)
• Appeal to Humor as Fallacy

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

21 Argument, Counterargument, & Refutation

In academic writing, we often use an Argument essay structure. Argument essays have these familiar components, just like other types of essays:

• Introduction
• Body Paragraphs

But Argument essays also contain these particular elements:

• Debatable thesis statement in the Introduction
• Argument – paragraphs which show support for the author’s thesis (for example: reasons, evidence, data, statistics)
• Counterargument – at least one paragraph which explains the opposite point of view
• Concession – a sentence or two acknowledging that there could be some truth to the Counterargument
• Refutation (also called Rebuttal) – sentences which explain why the Counterargument is not as strong as the original Argument

Consult  Introductions & Titles for more on writing debatable thesis statements and  Paragraphs ~ Developing Support for more about developing your Argument.

Imagine that you are writing about vaping. After reading several articles and talking with friends about vaping, you decide that you are strongly opposed to it.

Which working thesis statement would be better?

• Vaping should be illegal because it can lead to serious health problems.

Many students do not like vaping.

Because the first option provides a debatable position, it is a better starting point for an Argument essay.

Next, you would need to draft several paragraphs to explain your position. These paragraphs could include facts that you learned in your research, such as statistics about vapers’ health problems, the cost of vaping, its effects on youth, its harmful effects on people nearby, and so on, as an appeal to logos . If you have a personal story about the effects of vaping, you might include that as well, either in a Body Paragraph or in your Introduction, as an appeal to pathos .

A strong Argument essay would not be complete with only your reasons in support of your position. You should also include a Counterargument, which will show your readers that you have carefully researched and considered both sides of your topic. This shows that you are taking a measured, scholarly approach to the topic – not an overly-emotional approach, or an approach which considers only one side. This helps to establish your ethos as the author. It shows your readers that you are thinking clearly and deeply about the topic, and your Concession (“this may be true”) acknowledges that you understand other opinions are possible.

Here are some ways to introduce a Counterargument:

• Some people believe that vaping is not as harmful as smoking cigarettes.
• Critics argue that vaping is safer than conventional cigarettes.
• On the other hand, one study has shown that vaping can help people quit smoking cigarettes.

Your paragraph would then go on to explain more about this position; you would give evidence here from your research about the point of view that opposes your own opinion.

Here are some ways to begin a Concession and Refutation:

• While this may be true for some adults, the risks of vaping for adolescents outweigh its benefits.
• Although these critics may have been correct before, new evidence shows that vaping is, in some cases, even more harmful than smoking.
• This may have been accurate for adults wishing to quit smoking; however, there are other methods available to help people stop using cigarettes.

Your paragraph would then continue your Refutation by explaining more reasons why the Counterargument is weak. This also serves to explain why your original Argument is strong. This is a good opportunity to prove to your readers that your original Argument is the most worthy, and to persuade them to agree with you.

Activity ~ Practice with Counterarguments, Concessions, and Refutations

A. Examine the following thesis statements with a partner. Is each one debatable?

B. Write  your own Counterargument, Concession, and Refutation for each thesis statement.

Thesis Statements:

• Online classes are a better option than face-to-face classes for college students who have full-time jobs.
• Students who engage in cyberbullying should be expelled from school.
• Unvaccinated children pose risks to those around them.
• Governments should be allowed to regulate internet access within their countries.

Is this chapter:

…too easy, or you would like more detail? Read “ Further Your Understanding: Refutation and Rebuttal ” from Lumen’s Writing Skills Lab.

Note: links open in new tabs.

reasoning, logic

emotion, feeling, beliefs

moral character, credibility, trust, authority

goes against; believes the opposite of something

ENGLISH 087: Academic Advanced Writing Copyright © 2020 by Nancy Hutchison is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

30 Refutation Examples

Refutation refers to the act of proving a statement or theory wrong through the use of logical reasoning and evidence.

Some strategies for refutation, which we may use in an argumentative essay, speech, or debate, include:

• Reductio ad Absurdum : Taking an argument to its logical conclusion to demonstrate its absurdity.
• Counterexamples : Presenting counterexamples , which are practical and real-life examples that contradict the opponent’s claims.
• Identifying Logical Fallacies : Highlighting instances in which the opponent’s claims don’t follow logical reasoning.
• Highlighting Omissions: Demonstrating that the opponent failed to discuss or consider facts that dispute their claims.

I recommend to all my students that they refute possible counterclaims and contradicting perspectives in their argumentative essays in order to establish an authoritative position, demonstrate awareness of a broad range of perspectives, and add depth to your arguments.

Below is a range of methods of refutation.

Refutation Examples

1. analogical disproof.

This method involves refuting an argument by drawing a parallel to a situation that’s logically similar but absurd or clearly incorrect. Used properly, it can effectively puncture an opponent’s argument, showing that the same logic could lead to preposterous conclusions.

Example: “All birds fly. Penguins are birds, so they should fly.” The analogical disproof might be: “Not all office workers use computers. You’re an office worker, so should you not use a computer?”

2. Test of Consistency

This refutation method tests whether an argument stands consistent under different circumstances or scenarios. If an argument contains contradictions or doesn’t hold true in various contexts, it falls under inconsistency.

Example: Someone posits, “A person should always lend money to friends.” A consistency test might involve asking, “Should a person still lend money if they know their friend will spend it irresponsibly?”

See More: Consistency Examples

3. Rebuttal by Cause and Effect

This approach involves contesting an argument by disputing the assumed relationship between cause and effect. Here, you challenge the validity of the cause, the effect, or the linkage between the two.

Example: To refute, “Violent video games cause aggressive behavior in players,” you might present studies showing no significant increase in aggression among players of violent video games. This disrupts the asserted cause-effect relationship.

See More: Cause and Effect Examples

4. Prioritization of Evidence

This method questions the quality, reliability, or relevance of the evidence presented in an argument. You might challenge evidence’s weight, context, source, or legitimacy to weaken the opponent’s stance.

Example: Against the claim, “Spicy food aids in weight loss because it boosts metabolism,” you could highlight that the studies underpinning that claim are less reliable than studies demonstrating that exercise boosts weight loss.

5. Challenge the Relevance

Challenging the relevance involves disputing how pertinent or directly related the opponent’s points are to the argument at hand. Irrelevant points detract from the main argument and don’t strengthen the position they are intended to support.

Example: If someone argues, “Technology improves quality of life because smartphones have advanced cameras,” you might challenge the relevance by questioning how advanced cameras light to better quality of life.

See More: Relevance Examples

6. Statistical Refutation

Statistical refutation seeks to invalidate an argument by questioning the statistical evidence used. This might involve critiquing how data were collected, interpreted, or applied.

Example: If a study claims, “80% of people feel healthier when they eat chocolate daily,” you could challenge the data by asking who was surveyed and how the question was asked.

7. Appeal to Common Sense

An appeal to common sense challenges a claim by invoking widely accepted truths or knowledge. This strategy can debunk arguments that defy everyday observations or popular wisdom.

Example: If someone says, “to prevent climate change we need to shut down all coal-fired powerplants immediately,” you could refute it by appealing to the common sense notion that shutting them all down right now would cause the entire economy to collapse overnight.

See More: Examples of Common Sense

8. Pointing Out Oversimplification

This method involves highlighting how an opponent’s argument oversimplifies a complex issue. It exposes a lack of depth or nuance in their argument, undermining its credibility.

Example: A statement like “More jobs equals less poverty” could be refuted by pointing out the oversimplification in neglecting factors like cost of living and wage levels.

See More: Oversimplification Examples

9. Dismantling a False Dilemma

A false dilemma presents a situation as having only two possible outcomes or solutions. Dismantling a false dilemma involves introducing alternatives or proving that the two proposed options aren’t the only ones.

Example: Against the assertion, “Either we preserve our traditions, or we embrace progress,” you could challenge that we can preserve traditions and also move forward.

See More: False Dilemma Examples

10. Rebuttal through Definition

Rebuttal through definition involves challenging an argument by critiquing the definitions of the concepts, phenomena, or terms used. Here, you question the way an opponent has defined key elements of their argument.

Example: If an argument purports, “Happiness is having a lot of money,” you might dispute that definition by referencing different measures of happiness that don’t involve wealth, such as relationships or personal growth.

See More: Rebuttal Examples

11. Rebuttal by Precedence

This method employs historical or present precedents to debunk an argument. By illustrating similar situations where the opponent’s proposition didn’t hold true or feasible decisions were made contrary to the claim, the argument can be refuted.

Example: If faced with the claim, “No democracy can survive without a two-party system,” you could counter by citing examples of thriving democracies around the world with more than two significant parties.

12. Challenge the Representativeness

Challenging the representativeness entails scrutinizing whether an argument’s supporting evidence adequately represents the whole. It rejects sweeping generalizations or conclusions based on limited data.

Example: Should someone argue, “Most students dislike school, as proven by a survey from my class,” you could counter by questioning whether your class is representative of all students around the country.

13. Rebuttal through Syllogism

Rebuttal through syllogism uses the opponent’s premises to arrive at a different conclusion. If, through logical reasoning, the proposed conclusion does not necessarily follow the premises given, the argument can be effectively refuted.

Example: To the statement, “All apples are fruit. All fruit grow on trees. Therefore, all trees grow apples,” a syllogistic rebuttal might state, “While all apples grow on trees, not all trees grow apples.”

14. Pointing Out Non-Sequitur

Pointing out non-sequitur involves highlighting that an argument’s conclusion does not logically follow from its premises. Non-sequiturs often involve leaps in logic or unwarranted assumptions.

Example: In response to the claim, “He’s a great musician, so he’ll be a fantastic concert organizer,” one might point out the non-sequitur by reminding that a musical talent does not equate managerial skills.

15. Rebuttal by Exception

Rebuttal by exception operates by finding exceptions to the generalization made in an argument. By highlighting exceptions that contradict the claim, the argument’s validity is diminished.

Example: If someone argues, “All politicians are corrupt,” you could refute it by highlighting politicians known for their integrity and conviction.

16. Evidence-Based Counterargument

An evidence-based counterargument refutes a claim by presenting strong, credible, and relevant evidence that contradicts the original argument. This method is most effective when the counter-evidence directly disputes the original claim or its supporting facts.

Example: If a person claims, “Milk should be avoided because it’s unhealthy,” an evidence-based counterargument might bring up numerous scientific studies that indicate the nutritional benefits of milk.

See More: Counterargument Examples

17. Logical Analysis

A logical analysis focuses on the internal coherence and logical validity of an argument. By identifying logical fallacies or missteps in reasoning, you can refute a claim by showing how it fails to adhere to the principles of logic.

Example: A statement like “Every time I eat pizza, it rains, so pizza causes rain” can be refuted through logical analysis by highlighting the improper correlation being made.

18. Reductio ad Absurdum

The Reductio ad Absurdum technique demonstrates the absurdity of an argument by pushing it to its logical extreme, where it produces an absurd or preposterous conclusion. This method effectively challenges the premises or logic of the original claim.

Example: If someone argues, “We should never take any risks,” a Reductio ad Absurdum response might be: “By that logic, no one should ever leave their house because stepping outside is inherently risky.”

19. Counterexamples

Counterexamples are specific instances or examples that contradict a general claim or principle. By showing that the contrary is possible or proven, counterexamples can significantly weaken an argument.

Example: If someone claims, “All athletes are team players,” a compelling counterexample might highlight known instances of successful athletes who are infamous for their individualistic nature.

20. Question the Source

Questioning the source involves casting doubt on the credibility, relevance, or authority of the source supporting an argument. If the source is untrustworthy, the claim it supports is also brought into question.

Example: If the argument is “Vitamin C prevents cold because a juice-ad claims so,” you may question the objectivity of a source that may profit from selling more juice.

See More: Best Sources to Cite in Essays

21. Alternative Explanation

Providing an alternative explanation challenges an argument by proposing a different interpretation or understanding of the topic. This method allows you to dispute a claim by suggesting that another explanation is more plausible, relevant, or comprehensive.

Example: An argument might be, “Increased police presence reduces crime.” An alternative explanation could suggest that a more likely cause of reduced crime is improved social support systems and opportunities.

22. Challenge Assumptions

Challenging assumptions requires questioning the premise or basis of an argument. If the argument is built on flawed or questionable assumptions, exposing these can undermine the argument.

Example: When confronted with the argument “Marriage is essential for happiness,” one might challenge the underlying assumption that happiness necessarily requires marriage, citing examples of fulfilled single individuals.

See More: Assumptions Examples

23. Ethical or Moral Challenge

This type of refutation questions an argument on ethical or moral grounds. If the suggested actions or results of an argument lead to morally questionable outcomes, it can be a valid point of refutation.

Example: If someone says, “We should eliminate all pests for a more comfortable life,” you might counter it by pointing out the ethical concerns regarding biodiversity and the broader ecosystem’s health.

24. Using Comparison to Demonstrate Flawed Arguments

Comparisons involve using parallel scenarios, situations, or cases to refute an argument. By emphasizing the similarities or differences, you can question the validity of the argument.

Example: If the claim is “More expensive colleges provide a better education,” you could compare specific high-quality, affordable colleges with premium, yet underperforming ones to refute this argument.

25. Highlight Omissions

Highlighting omissions refers to pointing out relevant facts, information, or arguments that the opponent has left out of their claim. By illuminating these gaps, you can challenge the reliability or completeness of their argument.

Example: If someone argues, “He must be unsuccessful, he never went to college,” you can point out the omission of successful individuals who did not follow the traditional academic path.

26. Reframe the Debate

Reframing the debate involves changing the perspective or the center of the argument. It allows you to shift focus to a different, often overlooked aspect of the discussion, thus challenging the premises or relevance of the original argument.

Example: When faced with the claim, “Academic achievements determine success in life,” you can reframe the debate by suggesting that emotional intelligence, resilience, or interpersonal skills could be more significant indicators of life success.

27. Historical or Precedent-Based Refutation

This method utilizes historical events or established precedents to refute a claim. By referencing cases that contradict the opponent’s assertion, you can question its validity or applicability.

Example: In response to the claim, “Communism leads to societal chaos,” you could point out Cuba, who maintains law and order, to contradict the argument.

28. Practical Implications

Refuting via practical implications involves evaluating the real-world implications or consequences of an argument. This can be used to highlight unforeseen or negative implications that counter the argument’s intent.

Example: If someone suggests, “Cutting all funding for arts can help resolve government budget issues,” you could mention the practical implication that this could result in lost cultural heritage and inspire public backlash.

See Also: Implications Examples

29. Question Motives or Bias

This method of refutation questions whether the argument might be influenced by the speaker’s motives or biases. If the speaker seems to benefit from their claim or appears biased, their argument can be viewed suspiciously.

Example: If a smartphone developer declares, “My company’s phones are unbeatable,” question their bias as they stand to gain from promoting their company’s products.

See Also: Types of Bias

30. Seek Expert Testimony

Seeking expert testimony involves drawing on the knowledge or expertise of recognized authorities on the topic at hand. If expert opinion conflicts with the original statement, the credibility of the argument is undermined.

Example: In an argument about climate change, expert testimony from credible climate scientists refuting a claim of disbelievers can strengthen your refutation.

Understanding refutation will aid in developing stronger arguments and more impactful communication. I recommend to my students that they always refute the strongest claims of their opposition in order to more authoritatively prosecute their own perspective. But remember, in refuting opposing views, you need to be very careful not to fall into poor quality arguments, logical fallacies, or arguments that might otherwise damage your own legitimacy and reputation. Refutation must be clear, systematic, and well-thought-out in order for it to be effective.

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 44 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory (Pros & Cons)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Social Exchange Theory: Definition and Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 10 Cognitive Dissonance Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Unit 6: Argumentative Essay Writing

41 Counterargument and Refutation Development

In an argumentative essay, you need to convince your audience that your opinion is the most valid opinion. To do so, your essay needs to be balanced—it needs an opposing (opposite) viewpoint, known as a counter-argument . Even though you are arguing one side of an issue, you must include what someone from the other side would say. After your opponent’s view, include a refutation to demonstrate why the other point of view is wrong.

Identifying Counterarguments

There are many ways to identify alternative perspectives.

• Have an imaginary dialogue with a "devil's advocate."
• Discuss your topic with a classmate or group of classmates.
• Interview someone who holds the opposite opinion.
• Read about the topic to learn more about different perspectives.

Example Argument

In the conversation below the writer talks to someone with the opposite opinion. Roberto thinks professors should incorporate Facebook into their teaching. Fatima argues the opposing side. This discussion helps the writer identify a counterargument.

Roberto: I think professors should incorporate Facebook into their teaching . Students could connect with each other in and out of the classroom. ( Position and pro-argument )

Fatima : Hmmm… that could work, but I don’t think it’s a very good idea . Not all students are on Facebook. Some students don’t want to create accounts and share their private information. ( Counterargument )

Roberto: Well…. students could create an account that’s just for the course.

Fatima : Maybe, but some students won’t want to use their personal accounts and would find it troublesome to create an additional “temporary class account.” Plus, I think more young people prefer Instagram. 

Example Counterargument paragraph

Roberto used information from the conversation and evidence from sources to write the counterargument paragraph. This paragraph concludes with a concession of validity and is followed by the refutation.

Example Refutation paragraph

Counterargument and refutation stems.

Below are the stems organized in a table.

Watch this video

The video refers to counterarguments as “counterclaims” and refutations as “rebuttals.

From: Karen Baxley

someone who presents a counterargument; someone who pretends to be against the issue for the sake of discussing the issue

Academic Writing I Copyright © by UW-Madison ESL Program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Definition of Refutation

The literary term refutation refers to that part of an argument where a speaker or a writer encounters contradicting points of view. Alternatively, refutation can be described as the negation of an argument, opinion, testimony, doctrine, or theory, through contradicting evidence . It normally constitutes a part of an essay that disproves the opposing arguments.

An important distinction to be appreciated is the difference between refutation and counter-argument. In the case of counter-argument, the writer acknowledges that there is substance in the contradicting argument, yet he provides evidence for his alleged stance. On the other hand, refutation goes a bit further by presenting evidence that in turn negates the opposing arguments.

In a circumstance in which the writer happens to agree with certain aspects of the opposing argument, he makes a concession . However, writers and speakers rarely employ concession, as it can very easily undermine their own stance.

Types of Refutation

There are various ways through which the tool of refutation can be employed. The three most common modes used for the purpose of incorporating the device of refutation in an argument are : (1) refutation through evidence, (2) refutation through logic, and (3) refutation through exposing the discrepancies of opposing argument.

Refutation through Evidence

For an argument to be counted as one of the valid examples of refutation through evidence, it needs to be an argument backed up by some form of evidence. In the absence of clear bases or justifications it cannot be declared valid. Therefore, a writer can refute a contradicting argument if he can provide evidence that conclusively negates it, or by presenting more recent or credible evidence.

Refutation through Logic

Refutation examples through logic are quite tricky to construct. It involves deconstructing the opposing argument, and presenting it in such a way as to highlight the discrepancies present within the argument. Most skilled writers check the validity of their arguments before publishing them. This makes refutation through logic all the more difficult. There is no denying the fact then that refutation through logic constitutes a difficult task at hand. However, writers have employed this tool in their respective writings.

Refutation through Exposing Discrepancies

The method involves showing that one of the contradicting arguments lacks the core ingredient of centrality to the issue as the opposition had intended to project. Also, the writer can logically present his argument as being superior to the one presented by the opposition, by showing that the opposition’s argument lacks the crucial link to the topic. Further, the writer can highlight the insignificance of the opposition’s argument by exposing the deficiencies found within the opposing argument.

Examples of Refutation in Literature

Example #1: elements of rhetoric (by richard whately).

“If indeed very strong objections have obtained much currency, or have been just stated by an opponent, so that what is asserted is likely to be regarded as paradoxical, it may be advisable to begin with a Refutation.”

As can be seen from the excerpt quoted above, refutation of an objection should be placed in the midst of an argument. However, the nearer it is to the beginning the more effective it is likely to be.

Example #2: Remarks made to the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Seattle, Washington (By William Kennard, Chairman of the FCC)

“So we may well hear from a whole chorus of naysayers. And to all of them I have only one response: we cannot afford to wait. We cannot afford to let the homes and schools and businesses throughout America wait. Not when we have seen the future. We have seen what high capacity broadband can do for education and for our economy. We must act today to create an environment where all competitors have a fair shot at bringing high capacity bandwidth to consumers—especially residential consumers. And especially residential consumers in rural and underserved areas.”

This excerpt serves to illustrate the effectiveness of early refutation. The early placement of refutation within the extract has had an enhanced persuasive impact on the audience .

Function of Refutation

The tool of refutation has a crucial significance in writing. It is important in determining whether the speaker or writer has successfully persuaded his readers or not. Mostly, the device of refutation is employed when one is dealing with a controversial topic. It allows the reader to prefer one argument over another. The use of the device is frequently witnessed in intricate arguments.

Post navigation

When you write an academic essay, you make an argument: you propose a thesis and offer some reasoning, using evidence, that suggests why the thesis is true. When you counter-argue, you consider a possible argument  against  your thesis or some aspect of your reasoning. This is a good way to test your ideas when drafting, while you still have time to revise them. And in the finished essay, it can be a persuasive and (in both senses of the word) disarming tactic. It allows you to anticipate doubts and pre-empt objections that a skeptical reader might have; it presents you as the kind of person who weighs alternatives before arguing for one, who confronts difficulties instead of sweeping them under the rug, who is more interested in discovering the truth than winning a point.

Not every objection is worth entertaining, of course, and you shouldn't include one just to include one. But some imagining of other views, or of resistance to one's own, occurs in most good essays. And instructors are glad to encounter counterargument in student papers, even if they haven't specifically asked for it.

The Turn Against

Counterargument in an essay has two stages: you turn against your argument to challenge it and then you turn back to re-affirm it. You first imagine a skeptical reader, or cite an actual source, who might resist your argument by pointing out

• a problem with your demonstration, e.g., that a different conclusion could be drawn from the same facts, a key assumption is unwarranted, a key term is used unfairly, certain evidence is ignored or played down;
• one or more disadvantages or practical drawbacks to what you propose;
• an alternative explanation or proposal that makes more sense.

You introduce this turn against with a phrase like  One might object here that...  or  It might seem that...  or  It's true that...  or  Admittedly,...  or  Of course,...  or with an anticipated challenging question:  But how...?  or  But why...?  or  But isn't this just...?  or  But if this is so, what about...?  Then you state the case against yourself as briefly but as clearly and forcefully as you can, pointing to evidence where possible. (An obviously feeble or perfunctory counterargument does more harm than good.)

The Turn Back

Your return to your own argument—which you announce with a  but, yet, however, nevertheless or still —must likewise involve careful reasoning, not a flippant (or nervous) dismissal. In reasoning about the proposed counterargument, you may

• refute it, showing why it is mistaken—an apparent but not real problem;
• acknowledge its validity or plausibility, but suggest why on balance it's relatively less important or less likely than what you propose, and thus doesn't overturn it;
• concede its force and complicate your idea accordingly—restate your thesis in a more exact, qualified, or nuanced way that takes account of the objection, or start a new section in which you consider your topic in light of it. This will work if the counterargument concerns only an aspect of your argument; if it undermines your whole case, you need a new thesis.

Where to Put a Counterargument

Counterargument can appear anywhere in the essay, but it most commonly appears

• as part of your introduction—before you propose your thesis—where the existence of a different view is the motive for your essay, the reason it needs writing;
• as a section or paragraph just after your introduction, in which you lay out the expected reaction or standard position before turning away to develop your own;
• as a quick move within a paragraph, where you imagine a counterargument not to your main idea but to the sub-idea that the paragraph is arguing or is about to argue;
• as a section or paragraph just before the conclusion of your essay, in which you imagine what someone might object to what you have argued.

But watch that you don't overdo it. A turn into counterargument here and there will sharpen and energize your essay, but too many such turns will have the reverse effect by obscuring your main idea or suggesting that you're ambivalent.

Counterargument in Pre-Writing and Revising

Good thinking constantly questions itself, as Socrates observed long ago. But at some point in the process of composing an essay, you need to switch off the questioning in your head and make a case. Having such an inner conversation during the drafting stage, however, can help you settle on a case worth making. As you consider possible theses and begin to work on your draft, ask yourself how an intelligent person might plausibly disagree with you or see matters differently. When you can imagine an intelligent disagreement, you have an arguable idea.

And, of course, the disagreeing reader doesn't need to be in your head: if, as you're starting work on an essay, you ask a few people around you what  they  think of topic X (or of your idea about X) and keep alert for uncongenial remarks in class discussion and in assigned readings, you'll encounter a useful disagreement somewhere. Awareness of this disagreement, however you use it in your essay, will force you to sharpen your own thinking as you compose. If you come to find the counterargument truer than your thesis, consider making  it  your thesis and turning your original thesis into a counterargument. If you manage to draft an essay  without  imagining a counterargument, make yourself imagine one before you revise and see if you can integrate it.

Gordon Harvey (adapted from The Academic Essay: A Brief Anatomy), for the Writing Center at Harvard University

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, how to write an a+ argumentative essay.

Miscellaneous

You'll no doubt have to write a number of argumentative essays in both high school and college, but what, exactly, is an argumentative essay and how do you write the best one possible? Let's take a look.

A great argumentative essay always combines the same basic elements: approaching an argument from a rational perspective, researching sources, supporting your claims using facts rather than opinion, and articulating your reasoning into the most cogent and reasoned points. Argumentative essays are great building blocks for all sorts of research and rhetoric, so your teachers will expect you to master the technique before long.

But if this sounds daunting, never fear! We'll show how an argumentative essay differs from other kinds of papers, how to research and write them, how to pick an argumentative essay topic, and where to find example essays. So let's get started.

What Is an Argumentative Essay? How Is it Different from Other Kinds of Essays?

There are two basic requirements for any and all essays: to state a claim (a thesis statement) and to support that claim with evidence.

Though every essay is founded on these two ideas, there are several different types of essays, differentiated by the style of the writing, how the writer presents the thesis, and the types of evidence used to support the thesis statement.

Essays can be roughly divided into four different types:

#1: Argumentative #2: Persuasive #3: Expository #4: Analytical

So let's look at each type and what the differences are between them before we focus the rest of our time to argumentative essays.

Argumentative Essay

Argumentative essays are what this article is all about, so let's talk about them first.

An argumentative essay attempts to convince a reader to agree with a particular argument (the writer's thesis statement). The writer takes a firm stand one way or another on a topic and then uses hard evidence to support that stance.

An argumentative essay seeks to prove to the reader that one argument —the writer's argument— is the factually and logically correct one. This means that an argumentative essay must use only evidence-based support to back up a claim , rather than emotional or philosophical reasoning (which is often allowed in other types of essays). Thus, an argumentative essay has a burden of substantiated proof and sources , whereas some other types of essays (namely persuasive essays) do not.

You can write an argumentative essay on any topic, so long as there's room for argument. Generally, you can use the same topics for both a persuasive essay or an argumentative one, so long as you support the argumentative essay with hard evidence.

Example topics of an argumentative essay:

• "Should farmers be allowed to shoot wolves if those wolves injure or kill farm animals?"
• "Should the drinking age be lowered in the United States?"
• "Are alternatives to democracy effective and/or feasible to implement?"

The next three types of essays are not argumentative essays, but you may have written them in school. We're going to cover them so you know what not to do for your argumentative essay.

Persuasive Essay

Persuasive essays are similar to argumentative essays, so it can be easy to get them confused. But knowing what makes an argumentative essay different than a persuasive essay can often mean the difference between an excellent grade and an average one.

Persuasive essays seek to persuade a reader to agree with the point of view of the writer, whether that point of view is based on factual evidence or not. The writer has much more flexibility in the evidence they can use, with the ability to use moral, cultural, or opinion-based reasoning as well as factual reasoning to persuade the reader to agree the writer's side of a given issue.

Instead of being forced to use "pure" reason as one would in an argumentative essay, the writer of a persuasive essay can manipulate or appeal to the reader's emotions. So long as the writer attempts to steer the readers into agreeing with the thesis statement, the writer doesn't necessarily need hard evidence in favor of the argument.

Often, you can use the same topics for both a persuasive essay or an argumentative one—the difference is all in the approach and the evidence you present.

Example topics of a persuasive essay:

• "Should children be responsible for their parents' debts?"
• "Should cheating on a test be automatic grounds for expulsion?"
• "How much should sports leagues be held accountable for player injuries and the long-term consequences of those injuries?"

Expository Essay

An expository essay is typically a short essay in which the writer explains an idea, issue, or theme , or discusses the history of a person, place, or idea.

This is typically a fact-forward essay with little argument or opinion one way or the other.

Example topics of an expository essay:

• "The History of the Philadelphia Liberty Bell"
• "The Reasons I Always Wanted to be a Doctor"
• "The Meaning Behind the Colloquialism ‘People in Glass Houses Shouldn't Throw Stones'"

Analytical Essay

An analytical essay seeks to delve into the deeper meaning of a text or work of art, or unpack a complicated idea . These kinds of essays closely interpret a source and look into its meaning by analyzing it at both a macro and micro level.

This type of analysis can be augmented by historical context or other expert or widely-regarded opinions on the subject, but is mainly supported directly through the original source (the piece or art or text being analyzed) .

Example topics of an analytical essay:

• "Victory Gin in Place of Water: The Symbolism Behind Gin as the Only Potable Substance in George Orwell's 1984"
• "Amarna Period Art: The Meaning Behind the Shift from Rigid to Fluid Poses"
• "Adultery During WWII, as Told Through a Series of Letters to and from Soldiers"

There are many different types of essay and, over time, you'll be able to master them all.

A Typical Argumentative Essay Assignment

The average argumentative essay is between three to five pages, and will require at least three or four separate sources with which to back your claims . As for the essay topic , you'll most often be asked to write an argumentative essay in an English class on a "general" topic of your choice, ranging the gamut from science, to history, to literature.

But while the topics of an argumentative essay can span several different fields, the structure of an argumentative essay is always the same: you must support a claim—a claim that can reasonably have multiple sides—using multiple sources and using a standard essay format (which we'll talk about later on).

This is why many argumentative essay topics begin with the word "should," as in:

• "Should all students be required to learn chemistry in high school?"
• "Should children be required to learn a second language?"
• "Should schools or governments be allowed to ban books?"

These topics all have at least two sides of the argument: Yes or no. And you must support the side you choose with evidence as to why your side is the correct one.

But there are also plenty of other ways to frame an argumentative essay as well:

• "Does using social media do more to benefit or harm people?"
• "Does the legal status of artwork or its creators—graffiti and vandalism, pirated media, a creator who's in jail—have an impact on the art itself?"
• "Is or should anyone ever be ‘above the law?'"

Though these are worded differently than the first three, you're still essentially forced to pick between two sides of an issue: yes or no, for or against, benefit or detriment. Though your argument might not fall entirely into one side of the divide or another—for instance, you could claim that social media has positively impacted some aspects of modern life while being a detriment to others—your essay should still support one side of the argument above all. Your final stance would be that overall , social media is beneficial or overall , social media is harmful.

If your argument is one that is mostly text-based or backed by a single source (e.g., "How does Salinger show that Holden Caulfield is an unreliable narrator?" or "Does Gatsby personify the American Dream?"), then it's an analytical essay, rather than an argumentative essay. An argumentative essay will always be focused on more general topics so that you can use multiple sources to back up your claims.

Good Argumentative Essay Topics

So you know the basic idea behind an argumentative essay, but what topic should you write about?

Again, almost always, you'll be asked to write an argumentative essay on a free topic of your choice, or you'll be asked to select between a few given topics . If you're given complete free reign of topics, then it'll be up to you to find an essay topic that no only appeals to you, but that you can turn into an A+ argumentative essay.

What makes a "good" argumentative essay topic depends on both the subject matter and your personal interest —it can be hard to give your best effort on something that bores you to tears! But it can also be near impossible to write an argumentative essay on a topic that has no room for debate.

As we said earlier, a good argumentative essay topic will be one that has the potential to reasonably go in at least two directions—for or against, yes or no, and why . For example, it's pretty hard to write an argumentative essay on whether or not people should be allowed to murder one another—not a whole lot of debate there for most people!—but writing an essay for or against the death penalty has a lot more wiggle room for evidence and argument.

A good topic is also one that can be substantiated through hard evidence and relevant sources . So be sure to pick a topic that other people have studied (or at least studied elements of) so that you can use their data in your argument. For example, if you're arguing that it should be mandatory for all middle school children to play a sport, you might have to apply smaller scientific data points to the larger picture you're trying to justify. There are probably several studies you could cite on the benefits of physical activity and the positive effect structure and teamwork has on young minds, but there's probably no study you could use where a group of scientists put all middle-schoolers in one jurisdiction into a mandatory sports program (since that's probably never happened). So long as your evidence is relevant to your point and you can extrapolate from it to form a larger whole, you can use it as a part of your resource material.

And if you need ideas on where to get started, or just want to see sample argumentative essay topics, then check out these links for hundreds of potential argumentative essay topics.

101 Persuasive (or Argumentative) Essay and Speech Topics

301 Prompts for Argumentative Writing

Top 50 Ideas for Argumentative/Persuasive Essay Writing

[Note: some of these say "persuasive essay topics," but just remember that the same topic can often be used for both a persuasive essay and an argumentative essay; the difference is in your writing style and the evidence you use to support your claims.]

KO! Find that one argumentative essay topic you can absolutely conquer.

Argumentative Essay Format

Argumentative Essays are composed of four main elements:

• A position (your argument)
• Your reasons
• Supporting evidence for those reasons (from reliable sources)
• Counterargument(s) (possible opposing arguments and reasons why those arguments are incorrect)

If you're familiar with essay writing in general, then you're also probably familiar with the five paragraph essay structure . This structure is a simple tool to show how one outlines an essay and breaks it down into its component parts, although it can be expanded into as many paragraphs as you want beyond the core five.

The standard argumentative essay is often 3-5 pages, which will usually mean a lot more than five paragraphs, but your overall structure will look the same as a much shorter essay.

An argumentative essay at its simplest structure will look like:

Paragraph 1: Intro

• Set up the story/problem/issue
• Thesis/claim

Paragraph 2: Support

• Reason #1 claim is correct
• Supporting evidence with sources

Paragraph 3: Support

• Reason #2 claim is correct

Paragraph 4: Counterargument

• Explanation of argument for the other side
• Refutation of opposing argument with supporting evidence

Paragraph 5: Conclusion

• Re-state claim
• Sum up reasons and support of claim from the essay to prove claim is correct

Now let's unpack each of these paragraph types to see how they work (with examples!), what goes into them, and why.

Paragraph 1—Set Up and Claim

Your first task is to introduce the reader to the topic at hand so they'll be prepared for your claim. Give a little background information, set the scene, and give the reader some stakes so that they care about the issue you're going to discuss.

Next, you absolutely must have a position on an argument and make that position clear to the readers. It's not an argumentative essay unless you're arguing for a specific claim, and this claim will be your thesis statement.

Your thesis CANNOT be a mere statement of fact (e.g., "Washington DC is the capital of the United States"). Your thesis must instead be an opinion which can be backed up with evidence and has the potential to be argued against (e.g., "New York should be the capital of the United States").

Paragraphs 2 and 3—Your Evidence

These are your body paragraphs in which you give the reasons why your argument is the best one and back up this reasoning with concrete evidence .

The argument supporting the thesis of an argumentative essay should be one that can be supported by facts and evidence, rather than personal opinion or cultural or religious mores.

For example, if you're arguing that New York should be the new capital of the US, you would have to back up that fact by discussing the factual contrasts between New York and DC in terms of location, population, revenue, and laws. You would then have to talk about the precedents for what makes for a good capital city and why New York fits the bill more than DC does.

Your argument can't simply be that a lot of people think New York is the best city ever and that you agree.

In addition to using concrete evidence, you always want to keep the tone of your essay passionate, but impersonal . Even though you're writing your argument from a single opinion, don't use first person language—"I think," "I feel," "I believe,"—to present your claims. Doing so is repetitive, since by writing the essay you're already telling the audience what you feel, and using first person language weakens your writing voice.

For example,

"I think that Washington DC is no longer suited to be the capital city of the United States."

"Washington DC is no longer suited to be the capital city of the United States."

The second statement sounds far stronger and more analytical.

Paragraph 4—Argument for the Other Side and Refutation

Even without a counter argument, you can make a pretty persuasive claim, but a counterargument will round out your essay into one that is much more persuasive and substantial.

By anticipating an argument against your claim and taking the initiative to counter it, you're allowing yourself to get ahead of the game. This way, you show that you've given great thought to all sides of the issue before choosing your position, and you demonstrate in multiple ways how yours is the more reasoned and supported side.

Paragraph 5—Conclusion

This paragraph is where you re-state your argument and summarize why it's the best claim.

Briefly touch on your supporting evidence and voila! A finished argumentative essay.

Your essay should have just as awesome a skeleton as this plesiosaur does. (In other words: a ridiculously awesome skeleton)

Argumentative Essay Example: 5-Paragraph Style

It always helps to have an example to learn from. I've written a full 5-paragraph argumentative essay here. Look at how I state my thesis in paragraph 1, give supporting evidence in paragraphs 2 and 3, address a counterargument in paragraph 4, and conclude in paragraph 5.

Topic: Is it possible to maintain conflicting loyalties?

Paragraph 1

It is almost impossible to go through life without encountering a situation where your loyalties to different people or causes come into conflict with each other. Maybe you have a loving relationship with your sister, but she disagrees with your decision to join the army, or you find yourself torn between your cultural beliefs and your scientific ones. These conflicting loyalties can often be maintained for a time, but as examples from both history and psychological theory illustrate, sooner or later, people have to make a choice between competing loyalties, as no one can maintain a conflicting loyalty or belief system forever.

The first two sentences set the scene and give some hypothetical examples and stakes for the reader to care about.

The third sentence finishes off the intro with the thesis statement, making very clear how the author stands on the issue ("people have to make a choice between competing loyalties, as no one can maintain a conflicting loyalty or belief system forever." )

Paragraphs 2 and 3

Psychological theory states that human beings are not equipped to maintain conflicting loyalties indefinitely and that attempting to do so leads to a state called "cognitive dissonance." Cognitive dissonance theory is the psychological idea that people undergo tremendous mental stress or anxiety when holding contradictory beliefs, values, or loyalties (Festinger, 1957). Even if human beings initially hold a conflicting loyalty, they will do their best to find a mental equilibrium by making a choice between those loyalties—stay stalwart to a belief system or change their beliefs. One of the earliest formal examples of cognitive dissonance theory comes from Leon Festinger's When Prophesy Fails . Members of an apocalyptic cult are told that the end of the world will occur on a specific date and that they alone will be spared the Earth's destruction. When that day comes and goes with no apocalypse, the cult members face a cognitive dissonance between what they see and what they've been led to believe (Festinger, 1956). Some choose to believe that the cult's beliefs are still correct, but that the Earth was simply spared from destruction by mercy, while others choose to believe that they were lied to and that the cult was fraudulent all along. Both beliefs cannot be correct at the same time, and so the cult members are forced to make their choice.

But even when conflicting loyalties can lead to potentially physical, rather than just mental, consequences, people will always make a choice to fall on one side or other of a dividing line. Take, for instance, Nicolaus Copernicus, a man born and raised in Catholic Poland (and educated in Catholic Italy). Though the Catholic church dictated specific scientific teachings, Copernicus' loyalty to his own observations and scientific evidence won out over his loyalty to his country's government and belief system. When he published his heliocentric model of the solar system--in opposition to the geocentric model that had been widely accepted for hundreds of years (Hannam, 2011)-- Copernicus was making a choice between his loyalties. In an attempt t o maintain his fealty both to the established system and to what he believed, h e sat on his findings for a number of years (Fantoli, 1994). But, ultimately, Copernicus made the choice to side with his beliefs and observations above all and published his work for the world to see (even though, in doing so, he risked both his reputation and personal freedoms).

These two paragraphs provide the reasons why the author supports the main argument and uses substantiated sources to back those reasons.

The paragraph on cognitive dissonance theory gives both broad supporting evidence and more narrow, detailed supporting evidence to show why the thesis statement is correct not just anecdotally but also scientifically and psychologically. First, we see why people in general have a difficult time accepting conflicting loyalties and desires and then how this applies to individuals through the example of the cult members from the Dr. Festinger's research.

The next paragraph continues to use more detailed examples from history to provide further evidence of why the thesis that people cannot indefinitely maintain conflicting loyalties is true.

Paragraph 4

Some will claim that it is possible to maintain conflicting beliefs or loyalties permanently, but this is often more a matter of people deluding themselves and still making a choice for one side or the other, rather than truly maintaining loyalty to both sides equally. For example, Lancelot du Lac typifies a person who claims to maintain a balanced loyalty between to two parties, but his attempt to do so fails (as all attempts to permanently maintain conflicting loyalties must). Lancelot tells himself and others that he is equally devoted to both King Arthur and his court and to being Queen Guinevere's knight (Malory, 2008). But he can neither be in two places at once to protect both the king and queen, nor can he help but let his romantic feelings for the queen to interfere with his duties to the king and the kingdom. Ultimately, he and Queen Guinevere give into their feelings for one another and Lancelot—though he denies it—chooses his loyalty to her over his loyalty to Arthur. This decision plunges the kingdom into a civil war, ages Lancelot prematurely, and ultimately leads to Camelot's ruin (Raabe, 1987). Though Lancelot claimed to have been loyal to both the king and the queen, this loyalty was ultimately in conflict, and he could not maintain it.

Here we have the acknowledgement of a potential counter-argument and the evidence as to why it isn't true.

The argument is that some people (or literary characters) have asserted that they give equal weight to their conflicting loyalties. The refutation is that, though some may claim to be able to maintain conflicting loyalties, they're either lying to others or deceiving themselves. The paragraph shows why this is true by providing an example of this in action.

Paragraph 5

Whether it be through literature or history, time and time again, people demonstrate the challenges of trying to manage conflicting loyalties and the inevitable consequences of doing so. Though belief systems are malleable and will often change over time, it is not possible to maintain two mutually exclusive loyalties or beliefs at once. In the end, people always make a choice, and loyalty for one party or one side of an issue will always trump loyalty to the other.

The concluding paragraph summarizes the essay, touches on the evidence presented, and re-states the thesis statement.

How to Write an Argumentative Essay: 8 Steps

Writing the best argumentative essay is all about the preparation, so let's talk steps:

#1: Preliminary Research

If you have the option to pick your own argumentative essay topic (which you most likely will), then choose one or two topics you find the most intriguing or that you have a vested interest in and do some preliminary research on both sides of the debate.

Do an open internet search just to see what the general chatter is on the topic and what the research trends are.

Did your preliminary reading influence you to pick a side or change your side? Without diving into all the scholarly articles at length, do you believe there's enough evidence to support your claim? Have there been scientific studies? Experiments? Does a noted scholar in the field agree with you? If not, you may need to pick another topic or side of the argument to support.

#2: Pick Your Side and Form Your Thesis

Now's the time to pick the side of the argument you feel you can support the best and summarize your main point into your thesis statement.

Your thesis will be the basis of your entire essay, so make sure you know which side you're on, that you've stated it clearly, and that you stick by your argument throughout the entire essay .

#3: Heavy-Duty Research Time

You've taken a gander at what the internet at large has to say on your argument, but now's the time to actually read those sources and take notes.

Check scholarly journals online at Google Scholar , the Directory of Open Access Journals , or JStor . You can also search individual university or school libraries and websites to see what kinds of academic articles you can access for free. Keep track of your important quotes and page numbers and put them somewhere that's easy to find later.

And don't forget to check your school or local libraries as well!

#4: Outline

Follow the five-paragraph outline structure from the previous section.

Fill in your topic, your reasons, and your supporting evidence into each of the categories.

Before you begin to flesh out the essay, take a look at what you've got. Is your thesis statement in the first paragraph? Is it clear? Is your argument logical? Does your supporting evidence support your reasoning?

By outlining your essay, you streamline your process and take care of any logic gaps before you dive headfirst into the writing. This will save you a lot of grief later on if you need to change your sources or your structure, so don't get too trigger-happy and skip this step.

Now that you've laid out exactly what you'll need for your essay and where, it's time to fill in all the gaps by writing it out.

Take it one step at a time and expand your ideas into complete sentences and substantiated claims. It may feel daunting to turn an outline into a complete draft, but just remember that you've already laid out all the groundwork; now you're just filling in the gaps.

If you have the time before deadline, give yourself a day or two (or even just an hour!) away from your essay . Looking it over with fresh eyes will allow you to see errors, both minor and major, that you likely would have missed had you tried to edit when it was still raw.

Take a first pass over the entire essay and try your best to ignore any minor spelling or grammar mistakes—you're just looking at the big picture right now. Does it make sense as a whole? Did the essay succeed in making an argument and backing that argument up logically? (Do you feel persuaded?)

If not, go back and make notes so that you can fix it for your final draft.

Once you've made your revisions to the overall structure, mark all your small errors and grammar problems so you can fix them in the next draft.

#7: Final Draft

Use the notes you made on the rough draft and go in and hack and smooth away until you're satisfied with the final result.

A checklist for your final draft:

• Formatting is correct according to your teacher's standards
• No errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation
• Essay is the right length and size for the assignment
• The argument is present, consistent, and concise
• Each reason is supported by relevant evidence
• The essay makes sense overall

#8: Celebrate!

Once you've brought that final draft to a perfect polish and turned in your assignment, you're done! Go you!

Be prepared and ♪ you'll never go hungry again ♪, *cough*, or struggle with your argumentative essay-writing again. (Walt Disney Studios)

Good Examples of Argumentative Essays Online

Theory is all well and good, but examples are key. Just to get you started on what a fully-fleshed out argumentative essay looks like, let's see some examples in action.

Check out these two argumentative essay examples on the use of landmines and freons (and note the excellent use of concrete sources to back up their arguments!).

The Use of Landmines

A Shattered Sky

The Take-Aways: Keys to Writing an Argumentative Essay

At first, writing an argumentative essay may seem like a monstrous hurdle to overcome, but with the proper preparation and understanding, you'll be able to knock yours out of the park.

Remember the differences between a persuasive essay and an argumentative one, make sure your thesis is clear, and double-check that your supporting evidence is both relevant to your point and well-sourced . Pick your topic, do your research, make your outline, and fill in the gaps. Before you know it, you'll have yourself an A+ argumentative essay there, my friend.

What's Next?

Now you know the ins and outs of an argumentative essay, but how comfortable are you writing in other styles? Learn more about the four writing styles and when it makes sense to use each .

Understand how to make an argument, but still having trouble organizing your thoughts? Check out our guide to three popular essay formats and choose which one is right for you.

Ready to make your case, but not sure what to write about? We've created a list of 50 potential argumentative essay topics to spark your imagination.

Courtney scored in the 99th percentile on the SAT in high school and went on to graduate from Stanford University with a degree in Cultural and Social Anthropology. She is passionate about bringing education and the tools to succeed to students from all backgrounds and walks of life, as she believes open education is one of the great societal equalizers. She has years of tutoring experience and writes creative works in her free time.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

• How It Works
• Prices & Discounts

A Student's Guide: Crafting an Effective Rebuttal in Argumentative Essays

Table of contents

Picture this – you're in the middle of a heated debate with your classmate. You've spent minutes passionately laying out your argument, backing it up with well-researched facts and statistics, and you think you've got it in the bag. But then, your classmate fires back with a rebuttal that leaves you stumped, and you realize your argument wasn't as bulletproof as you thought.

This scenario could easily translate to the world of writing – specifically, to argumentative essays. Just as in a real-life debate, your arguments in an essay need to stand up to scrutiny, and that's where the concept of a rebuttal comes into play.

In this blog post, we will unpack the notion of a rebuttal in an argumentative essay, delve into its importance, and show you how to write one effectively. We will provide you with step-by-step guidance, illustrate with examples, and give you expert tips to enhance your essay writing skills. So, get ready to strengthen your arguments and make your essays more compelling than ever before!

Understanding the Concept of a Rebuttal

In the world of debates and argumentative essays, a rebuttal is your opportunity to counter an opposing argument. It's your chance to present evidence and reasoning that discredits the counter-argument, thereby strengthening your stance.

Let's simplify this with an example . Imagine you're writing an argumentative essay on why school uniforms should be mandatory. One common opposing argument could be that uniforms curb individuality. Your rebuttal to this could argue that uniforms do not stifle individuality but promote equality, and help reduce distractions, thus creating a better learning environment.

Understanding rebuttals and their structure is the first step towards integrating them into your argumentative essays effectively. This process will add depth to your argument and demonstrate your ability to consider different perspectives, making your essay robust and thought-provoking.

Let's get into the nitty-gritty of how to structure your rebuttals and make them as effective as possible in the following sections.

The Structural Anatomy of a Rebuttal: How It Fits into Your Argumentative Essay

The potency of an argumentative essay lies in its structure, and a rebuttal is an integral part of this structure. It ensures that your argument remains balanced and considers opposing viewpoints. So, how does a rebuttal fit into an argumentative essay? Where does it go?

In a traditional argumentative essay structure, the rebuttal generally follows your argument and precedes the conclusion. Here's a simple breakdown:

Introduction : The opening segment where you introduce the topic and your thesis statement.

Your Argument : The body of your essay where you present your arguments in support of your thesis.

Rebuttal or Counterargument : Here's where you present the opposing arguments and your rebuttals against them.

Conclusion : The final segment where you wrap up your argument, reaffirming your thesis statement.

Understanding the placement of the rebuttal within your essay will help you maintain a logical flow in your writing, ensuring that your readers can follow your arguments and counterarguments seamlessly. Let's delve deeper into the construction of a rebuttal in the next section.

Components of a Persuasive Rebuttal: Breaking It Down

A well-crafted rebuttal can significantly fortify your argumentative essay. However, the key to a persuasive rebuttal lies in its construction. Let's break down the components of an effective rebuttal:

Recognize the Opposing Argument : Begin by acknowledging the opposing point of view. This helps you establish credibility with your readers and shows them that you're not dismissing other perspectives.

Refute the Opposing Argument : Now, address why you believe the opposing viewpoint is incorrect or flawed. Use facts, logic, or reasoning to dismantle the counter-argument.

Support Your Rebuttal : Provide evidence, examples, or facts that support your rebuttal. This not only strengthens your argument but also adds credibility to your stance.

Transition to the Next Point : Finally, provide a smooth transition to the next part of your essay. This could be another argument in favor of your thesis or your conclusion, depending on the structure of your essay.

Each of these components is a crucial building block for a persuasive rebuttal. By structuring your rebuttal correctly, you can effectively refute opposing arguments and fortify your own stance. Let's move to some practical applications of these components in the next section.

Building Your Rebuttal: A Step-by-Step Guide

Writing a persuasive rebuttal may seem challenging, especially if you're new to argumentative essays. However, it's less daunting when broken down into smaller steps. Here's a practical step-by-step guide on how to construct your rebuttal:

Step 1: Identify the Counter-Arguments

The first step is to identify the potential counter-arguments that could be made against your thesis. This requires you to put yourself in your opposition's shoes and think critically about your own arguments.

Step 2: Choose the Strongest Counter-Argument

It's not practical or necessary to respond to every potential counter-argument. Instead, choose the most significant one(s) that, if left unaddressed, could undermine your argument.

Step 3: Research and Collect Evidence 

Once you've chosen a counter-argument to rebut, it's time to research. Find facts, statistics, or examples that clearly refute the counter-argument. Remember, the stronger your evidence, the more persuasive your rebuttal will be.

Step 4: Write the Rebuttal

Using the components we outlined earlier, write your rebuttal. Begin by acknowledging the opposing argument, refute it using your evidence, and then transition smoothly to your next point.

Step 5: Review and Refine

Finally, review your rebuttal. Check for logical consistency, clarity, and strength of evidence. Refine as necessary to ensure your rebuttal is as persuasive and robust as possible.

Remember, practice makes perfect. The more you practice writing rebuttals, the more comfortable you'll become at identifying strong counter-arguments and refuting them effectively. Let's illustrate these steps with a practical example in the next section.

Practical Example: Constructing a Rebuttal

In this section, we'll apply the steps discussed above to construct a rebuttal. We'll use a hypothetical argumentative essay topic: "Should schools switch to a four-day school week?"

Thesis Statement : You are arguing in favor of a four-day school week, citing reasons such as improved student mental health, reduced operational costs for schools, and enhanced quality of education due to extended hours.

Identify Counter-Arguments : The opposition could argue that a four-day school week might lead to childcare issues for working parents or that the extended hours each day could lead to student burnout.

Choose the Strongest Counter-Argument : The point about childcare issues for working parents is potentially a significant concern that needs addressing.

Research and Collect Evidence : Research reveals that many community organizations offer affordable after-school programs. Additionally, some schools adopting a four-day week have offered optional fifth-day enrichment programs.

Write the Rebuttal : "While it's valid to consider the childcare challenges a four-day school week could impose on working parents, many community organizations provide affordable after-school programs. Moreover, some schools that have already adopted the four-day week offer an optional fifth-day enrichment program, demonstrating that viable solutions exist."

Review and Refine: Re-read your rebuttal, refine for clarity and impact, and ensure it integrates smoothly into your argument.

This is a simplified example, but it serves to illustrate the process of crafting a rebuttal. Let's move on to look at two full-length examples to further demonstrate effective rebuttals.

Case Study: Effective vs. Ineffective Rebuttal

Now that we've covered the theoretical and practical aspects, let's delve into two case studies. These examples will compare an effective rebuttal versus an ineffective one, so you can better understand what separates a compelling argument from a weak one.

Example 1: "Homework is unnecessary."

Ineffective Rebuttal : "I don't agree with you. Homework is important because it's part of the curriculum and it helps students study."

Effective Rebuttal : "Your concern about the overuse of homework is valid, considering the amount of stress students face today. However, research shows that homework, when thoughtfully assigned and not overused, can reinforce classroom learning, provide students with valuable time management skills, and help teachers evaluate student understanding."

The effective rebuttal acknowledges the opposing argument, uses evidence-backed reasoning, and strengthens the argument by showing the value of homework in the larger context of learning.

Example 2: "Standardized testing doesn't accurately measure student intelligence."

Ineffective Rebuttal : "I think you're wrong. Standardized tests have been around for a long time, and they wouldn't use them if they didn't work."

Effective Rebuttal : "Indeed, the limitations of standardized testing, such as potential cultural bias or the inability to measure creativity, are recognized issues. However, these tests are a tool—albeit an imperfect one—for comparing student achievement across regions and identifying areas where curriculum and teaching methods might need improvement. More comprehensive methods, blending standardized testing with other assessment forms, are promising approaches for future development."

The effective rebuttal in this instance acknowledges the flaws in standardized testing but highlights its role as a tool for larger educational system assessments and improvements.

Remember, an effective rebuttal is respectful, acknowledges the opposing viewpoint, provides strong counter-arguments, and integrates evidence. With practice, you will get better at crafting compelling rebuttals. In the next section, we will discuss some additional strategies to improve your rebuttal skills.

Final Thoughts

The art of constructing a compelling rebuttal is a crucial skill in argumentative essay writing. It's not just about presenting your own views but also about understanding, acknowledging, and effectively countering the opposing viewpoint. This makes your argument more robust and balanced, increasing its persuasive power.

However, developing this skill requires patience, practice, and a thoughtful approach. The techniques we've discussed in this guide can serve as a starting point, but remember that every argument is unique, and flexibility is key.

Always be ready to adapt and refine your rebuttal strategy based on the particular argument and evidence you're dealing with. And don't shy away from seeking feedback and learning from others - this is how we grow as writers and thinkers.

But remember, you're not alone on this journey. If you're ever struggling with writing your argumentative essay or crafting that perfect rebuttal, we're here to help. Our experienced writers at Writers Per Hour are well-versed in the nuances of argumentative writing and can assist you in achieving your academic goals.

So don't stress - embrace the challenge of argumentative writing, keep refining your skills, and remember that help is just a click away! In the next section, you'll find additional resources to continue learning and growing in your argumentative writing journey.

Additional Resources

As you continue to learn and develop your argumentative writing skills, having access to additional resources can be immensely beneficial. Here are some that you might find helpful:

Posts from Writers Per Hour Blog :

• How Significant Are Opposing Points of View in an Argument
• Writing a Hook for an Argumentative Essay
• Strong Argumentative Essay Topic Ideas
• Writing an Introduction for Your Argumentative Essay

External Resources :

• University of California Berkeley Student Learning Center: Writing Argumentative Essays
• Stanford Online Writing Center: Techniques of Persuasive Argument

Remember, mastery in argumentative writing doesn't happen overnight – it's a journey that requires patience, practice, and persistence. But with the right guidance and resources, you're already on the right path. And, of course, if you ever need assistance, our argumentative essay writing service  services are always ready to help you reach your academic goals. Happy writing!

Share this article

Achieve Academic Success with Expert Assistance!

Crafted from Scratch for You.

Ensuring Your Work’s Originality.

Transform Your Draft into Excellence.

Perfecting Your Paper’s Grammar, Style, and Format (APA, MLA, etc.).

Calculate the cost of your paper

Get ideas for your essay

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Organizing Your Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

How can I effectively present my argument?

In order for your argument to be persuasive, it must use an organizational structure that the audience perceives as both logical and easy to parse. Three argumentative methods —the  Toulmin Method , Classical Method , and Rogerian Method — give guidance for how to organize the points in an argument.

Note that these are only three of the most popular models for organizing an argument. Alternatives exist. Be sure to consult your instructor and/or defer to your assignment’s directions if you’re unsure which to use (if any).

Toulmin Method

The  Toulmin Method  is a formula that allows writers to build a sturdy logical foundation for their arguments. First proposed by author Stephen Toulmin in  The Uses of Argument (1958), the Toulmin Method emphasizes building a thorough support structure for each of an argument's key claims.

The basic format for the Toulmin Method  is as follows:

Claim:  In this section, you explain your overall thesis on the subject. In other words, you make your main argument.

Data (Grounds):  You should use evidence to support the claim. In other words, provide the reader with facts that prove your argument is strong.

Warrant (Bridge):  In this section, you explain why or how your data supports the claim. As a result, the underlying assumption that you build your argument on is grounded in reason.

Backing (Foundation):  Here, you provide any additional logic or reasoning that may be necessary to support the warrant.

Counterclaim:  You should anticipate a counterclaim that negates the main points in your argument. Don't avoid arguments that oppose your own. Instead, become familiar with the opposing perspective.   If you respond to counterclaims, you appear unbiased (and, therefore, you earn the respect of your readers). You may even want to include several counterclaims to show that you have thoroughly researched the topic.

Rebuttal:  In this section, you incorporate your own evidence that disagrees with the counterclaim. It is essential to include a thorough warrant or bridge to strengthen your essay’s argument. If you present data to your audience without explaining how it supports your thesis, your readers may not make a connection between the two, or they may draw different conclusions.

Example of the Toulmin Method:

Claim:  Hybrid cars are an effective strategy to fight pollution.

Data1:  Driving a private car is a typical citizen's most air-polluting activity.

Warrant 1:  Due to the fact that cars are the largest source of private (as opposed to industrial) air pollution, switching to hybrid cars should have an impact on fighting pollution.

Data 2:  Each vehicle produced is going to stay on the road for roughly 12 to 15 years.

Warrant 2:  Cars generally have a long lifespan, meaning that the decision to switch to a hybrid car will make a long-term impact on pollution levels.

Data 3:  Hybrid cars combine a gasoline engine with a battery-powered electric motor.

Warrant 3:  The combination of these technologies produces less pollution.

Counterclaim:  Instead of focusing on cars, which still encourages an inefficient culture of driving even as it cuts down on pollution, the nation should focus on building and encouraging the use of mass transit systems.

Rebuttal:  While mass transit is an idea that should be encouraged, it is not feasible in many rural and suburban areas, or for people who must commute to work. Thus, hybrid cars are a better solution for much of the nation's population.

Rogerian Method

The Rogerian Method  (named for, but not developed by, influential American psychotherapist Carl R. Rogers) is a popular method for controversial issues. This strategy seeks to find a common ground between parties by making the audience understand perspectives that stretch beyond (or even run counter to) the writer’s position. Moreso than other methods, it places an emphasis on reiterating an opponent's argument to his or her satisfaction. The persuasive power of the Rogerian Method lies in its ability to define the terms of the argument in such a way that:

• your position seems like a reasonable compromise.
• you seem compassionate and empathetic.

The basic format of the Rogerian Method  is as follows:

Introduction:  Introduce the issue to the audience, striving to remain as objective as possible.

Opposing View : Explain the other side’s position in an unbiased way. When you discuss the counterargument without judgement, the opposing side can see how you do not directly dismiss perspectives which conflict with your stance.

Statement of Validity (Understanding):  This section discusses how you acknowledge how the other side’s points can be valid under certain circumstances. You identify how and why their perspective makes sense in a specific context, but still present your own argument.

Statement of Your Position:  By this point, you have demonstrated that you understand the other side’s viewpoint. In this section, you explain your own stance.

Statement of Contexts : Explore scenarios in which your position has merit. When you explain how your argument is most appropriate for certain contexts, the reader can recognize that you acknowledge the multiple ways to view the complex issue.

Statement of Benefits:  You should conclude by explaining to the opposing side why they would benefit from accepting your position. By explaining the advantages of your argument, you close on a positive note without completely dismissing the other side’s perspective.

Example of the Rogerian Method:

Introduction:  The issue of whether children should wear school uniforms is subject to some debate.

Opposing View:  Some parents think that requiring children to wear uniforms is best.

Statement of Validity (Understanding):  Those parents who support uniforms argue that, when all students wear the same uniform, the students can develop a unified sense of school pride and inclusiveness.

Statement of Your Position : Students should not be required to wear school uniforms. Mandatory uniforms would forbid choices that allow students to be creative and express themselves through clothing.

Statement of Contexts:  However, even if uniforms might hypothetically promote inclusivity, in most real-life contexts, administrators can use uniform policies to enforce conformity. Students should have the option to explore their identity through clothing without the fear of being ostracized.

Statement of Benefits:  Though both sides seek to promote students' best interests, students should not be required to wear school uniforms. By giving students freedom over their choice, students can explore their self-identity by choosing how to present themselves to their peers.

Classical Method

The Classical Method of structuring an argument is another common way to organize your points. Originally devised by the Greek philosopher Aristotle (and then later developed by Roman thinkers like Cicero and Quintilian), classical arguments tend to focus on issues of definition and the careful application of evidence. Thus, the underlying assumption of classical argumentation is that, when all parties understand the issue perfectly, the correct course of action will be clear.

The basic format of the Classical Method  is as follows:

Introduction (Exordium): Introduce the issue and explain its significance. You should also establish your credibility and the topic’s legitimacy.

Statement of Background (Narratio): Present vital contextual or historical information to the audience to further their understanding of the issue. By doing so, you provide the reader with a working knowledge about the topic independent of your own stance.

Proposition (Propositio): After you provide the reader with contextual knowledge, you are ready to state your claims which relate to the information you have provided previously. This section outlines your major points for the reader.

Proof (Confirmatio): You should explain your reasons and evidence to the reader. Be sure to thoroughly justify your reasons. In this section, if necessary, you can provide supplementary evidence and subpoints.

Refutation (Refuatio): In this section, you address anticipated counterarguments that disagree with your thesis. Though you acknowledge the other side’s perspective, it is important to prove why your stance is more logical.  

Conclusion (Peroratio): You should summarize your main points. The conclusion also caters to the reader’s emotions and values. The use of pathos here makes the reader more inclined to consider your argument.  

Example of the Classical Method:  

Introduction (Exordium): Millions of workers are paid a set hourly wage nationwide. The federal minimum wage is standardized to protect workers from being paid too little. Research points to many viewpoints on how much to pay these workers. Some families cannot afford to support their households on the current wages provided for performing a minimum wage job .

Statement of Background (Narratio): Currently, millions of American workers struggle to make ends meet on a minimum wage. This puts a strain on workers’ personal and professional lives. Some work multiple jobs to provide for their families.

Proposition (Propositio): The current federal minimum wage should be increased to better accommodate millions of overworked Americans. By raising the minimum wage, workers can spend more time cultivating their livelihoods.

Proof (Confirmatio): According to the United States Department of Labor, 80.4 million Americans work for an hourly wage, but nearly 1.3 million receive wages less than the federal minimum. The pay raise will alleviate the stress of these workers. Their lives would benefit from this raise because it affects multiple areas of their lives.

Refutation (Refuatio): There is some evidence that raising the federal wage might increase the cost of living. However, other evidence contradicts this or suggests that the increase would not be great. Additionally,   worries about a cost of living increase must be balanced with the benefits of providing necessary funds to millions of hardworking Americans.

Conclusion (Peroratio): If the federal minimum wage was raised, many workers could alleviate some of their financial burdens. As a result, their emotional wellbeing would improve overall. Though some argue that the cost of living could increase, the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks.

Other Links

• At Parturient Porta Vestibulum Integer Sociosqu Vitae Aptent Aptent Praesent Rhoncus Urna

Four Step Refutation

Skilled debaters not only have a command of language and content, but are able to present their arguments in an organized fashion that facilitates the audience following along in the debate. Refutation is designed to introduce arguments, undermine opponents' arguments, rebuild arguments, and clarify own arguments.

One way to do this is through a process called “four step refutation.” This process is used regularly by individuals in day-to-day interactions. This is often referred to as the “Four S’s” of singposting, stating, supporting, and summarizing.

Step One: Signal

Identify the claim you are answering..

In a single debate, there will be multiple arguments, pieces of evidence, and sometimes tangents that a debater must address. Clearly identifying which of your opponent’s arguments you are responding to will keep the flow of the debate progressing in a coherent manner.

Step Two: State

Make your (counter) claim..

After articulating your opponent’s position, you should make your response in a concise, articulate manner.

Step Three: Support

Reference evidence or explain the justification..

Many arguments will be supported by evidence that provides some justification for the claim being advanced. Reading or referring to evidence already read in the debate will buttress claims advanced by the debater. Oftentimes, evidence is not needed, and the debater’s own brilliant analysis can provide the justification for the claim.

Step Four: Summarize

Explain the importance of your argument..

For an audience to reach a judgment on an issue, they must recognize the comparative importance of different arguments. Detailing the way in which your argument implicates your opponent's position is a crucial way to leave an impression on audience members.

• (Signalling) My opponent argued that the death penalty deters crime.
• (State) In fact, the death penalty increases crime.
• (Support) According to a nationwide study conducted by Professor Wiggins in 2002, violent crime has actually increased in states with the death penalty while crime has decreased in states without the death penalty.
• (Summarize) If this study is true, and the methodology is certainly sound, then the central justification for the death penalty has no merit.

Best 10+ Argumentative Essay Examples for Effective Writing

Discover top-notch argumentative essay examples that will elevate your writing skills and help you craft compelling arguments effectively.

Argumentative essays are a common assignment in academic writing that requires students to present a strong argument and support it with evidence. These essays aim to persuade the reader to agree with the writer's viewpoint on a particular topic or issue. To help you understand the key elements and techniques of writing an effective argumentative essay, we have compiled a list of the best 10+ argumentative essay examples. These examples will not only inspire you but also provide you with insights into different types of argumentative essays and how to write them successfully.

What is an Argumentative Essay?

An argumentative essay is a type of essay that presents a well-reasoned argument on a specific topic. The goal of this essay is to convince the reader to adopt the writer's perspective or take a certain action. In an argumentative essay, the writer presents evidence, supports claims with facts, and provides counterarguments to address opposing views. This type of essay relies heavily on logical reasoning and critical thinking skills.

Types of Argumentative Essays:

Classical Argument : This type of essay presents a clear argument, supports it with evidence, and refutes counterarguments.

Rogerian Argument : In this approach, the writer seeks to find common ground and establish mutual understanding between opposing viewpoints.

Toulmin Argument : The Toulmin model emphasizes using evidence to support claims, identifying and responding to counterarguments, and acknowledging the limitations of the argument.

Deductive Argument : In a deductive argument essay, the writer starts with a general statement or premise and provides specific examples to support it.

Inductive Argument : The inductive argument essay begins with detailed observations or examples and uses them to draw a general conclusion.

How to Write an Argumentative Essay:

To write an effective argumentative essay, follow these steps:

• Choose a debatable topic: Select a topic that is open to different interpretations or has contrasting viewpoints.
• Conduct thorough research: Gather relevant and credible sources to support your argument and address counterarguments.
• Develop a clear thesis statement: Your thesis statement should express your main argument and provide a roadmap for the essay.
• Outline your essay: Organize your thoughts and evidence in a logical order. Create sections for your introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion.
• Write a compelling introduction: Grab the reader's attention with a hook, provide background information, and present your thesis statement.
• Present your argument: Each body paragraph should focus on a separate point and provide evidence to support it.
• Address counterarguments: Acknowledge opposing viewpoints and refute them with evidence and logical reasoning.
• Summarize and conclude: Restate your thesis, summarize your main points, and leave the reader with a thought-provoking conclusion.

Now, let's explore the best 10+ argumentative essay examples that will serve as inspiration for your own writing endeavors.

Example 1: Should the use of cell phones be allowed in schools?

• Introduction: Cell phones have become an integral part of our daily lives, but their usage in schools remains a topic of debate.
• Body Paragraph 1: Cell phones can be used as educational tools as they provide access to a wealth of information and resources.
• Body Paragraph 2: Allowing cell phones in schools can enhance communication between students, parents, and teachers.
• Body Paragraph 3: The use of cell phones can promote safety and security as students can quickly contact authorities in case of emergencies.
• Counterargument: Opponents argue that cell phone usage can lead to distractions and disrupt the learning environment.
• Refutation: Proper guidelines can be implemented to regulate cell phone usage and minimize distractions.
• Conclusion: Allowing cell phones in schools, with appropriate restrictions, can have numerous benefits for education and overall student well-being.

Example 2: Should animal testing be banned?

• Introduction: Animal testing has long been a subject of ethical concern, and the debate about its necessity continues to rage on.
• Body Paragraph 1: Animal testing has contributed to numerous scientific breakthroughs and advancements in medicine.
• Body Paragraph 2: The suffering and unethical treatment of animals during testing is morally wrong and goes against our duty to protect animal rights.
• Body Paragraph 3: Alternative methods, such as in vitro testing and advanced computer simulations, can provide more accurate results without the need for animal experimentation.
• Counterargument: Critics argue that without animal testing, scientific progress and medical advancements would be hindered.
• Refutation: Increased funding and focus on alternative testing methods can lead to further advancements while eliminating the need for animal testing.
• Conclusion: Banning animal testing is a necessary step towards a more ethical and effective approach to scientific research and medical advancements.

Example 3: Is social media beneficial or harmful to society?

• Introduction: Social media has rapidly become a powerful force in our lives, but its impact on society remains a contentious issue.
• Body Paragraph 1: Social media allows for global connectivity and facilitates the spread of information and ideas.
• Body Paragraph 2: Social media provides a platform for marginalized groups to raise awareness, mobilize, and effect positive change.
• Body Paragraph 3: The addictive nature of social media and its negative impact on mental health is a cause for concern.
• Counterargument: Critics argue that social media promotes excessive self-comparison, depression, and cyberbullying.
• Refutation: Education and awareness campaigns can help individuals navigate social media's negative aspects and promote healthier online behavior.
• Conclusion: While social media has its downsides, its positive aspects outweigh the negatives, making it a valuable tool for communication and societal progress.

Example 4: Should college education be free for all?

• Introduction: The rising cost of college education has sparked a debate about accessibility and affordability.
• Body Paragraph 1: Providing free college education can ensure equal opportunities for all, regardless of socioeconomic backgrounds.
• Body Paragraph 2: Free college education can lead to a more educated society, benefiting the economy and promoting social mobility.
• Body Paragraph 3: Critics argue that free education would result in oversaturation of the job market and devalue the worth of a college degree.
• Refutation: Strict admission criteria and high-quality education can maintain the value of a college degree while ensuring broader access.
• Conclusion: By making college education free, societies can break down barriers to education and create a more equitable and prosperous future.

Example 5: Is the death penalty an effective form of punishment?

• Introduction: The death penalty has long been a topic of ethical and moral debate.
• Body Paragraph 1: Supporters argue that the death penalty deters potential criminals and ensures justice for the most heinous crimes.
• Body Paragraph 2: The death penalty is irreversible and carries the risk of executing innocent individuals, making it ethically unacceptable.
• Body Paragraph 3: Alternative punishments, such as life imprisonment, can achieve the same objectives without the risk of wrongful execution.
• Counterargument: Some claim that the death penalty is a necessary retribution for the most severe crimes.
• Refutation: Life imprisonment can serve as a just punishment, allowing for potential reformation and avoiding the irreversible loss of innocent lives.
• Conclusion: Abolishing the death penalty is a crucial step towards a more humane and just criminal justice system.

Example 6: Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be labeled?

• Introduction: The use of genetically modified organisms in food production has become a topic of public concern, raising questions about transparency and consumer choice.
• Body Paragraph 1: Labeling GMOs allows consumers to make informed decisions about their food choices based on personal preferences and health considerations.
• Body Paragraph 2: The potential risks and long-term effects of GMOs on human health and the environment necessitate transparent labeling.
• Body Paragraph 3: Opponents argue that mandatory labeling of GMOs would increase food prices and stigmatize biotechnology.
• Refutation: Proper regulation and accurate labeling can provide necessary information without significantly impacting food prices or stigmatizing GMOs.
• Conclusion: Labeling GMOs is a matter of consumer rights, allowing individuals to make informed choices and promoting transparency in the food industry.

Example 7: Should plastic bags be banned?

• Introduction: Single-use plastic bags have emerged as a major environmental concern, prompting discussions about their impact and the need for regulation.
• Body Paragraph 1: Banning plastic bags can reduce plastic pollution, protect wildlife, and mitigate the harmful effects of plastic waste on ecosystems.
• Body Paragraph 2: Alternatives to plastic bags, such as reusable bags, are readily available and provide a more sustainable option for consumers.
• Body Paragraph 3: Critics argue that banning plastic bags would inconvenience consumers and negatively impact businesses.
• Refutation: Encouraging the use of reusable bags and providing alternative solutions can address these concerns without compromising the environment.
• Conclusion: Banning plastic bags is a necessary step towards reducing plastic pollution and promoting a more sustainable future.

Example 8: Should the voting age be lowered to 16?

• Introduction: The debate surrounding the voting age hinges on the question of youth political engagement and civic participation.
• Body Paragraph 1: Lowering the voting age to 16 can promote youth involvement in local, national, and global issues.
• Body Paragraph 2: Today's youth are well-informed and actively engaged in social and political matters, justifying their right to vote.
• Body Paragraph 3: Critics argue that 16-year-olds lack the necessary maturity and life experience to make informed voting decisions.
• Refutation: Many 16-year-olds contribute to society, work, pay taxes, and drive, indicating a level of responsibility and ability to make informed decisions.
• Conclusion: Lowering the voting age to 16 can empower the youth, thereby fostering a more democratic and inclusive political landscape.

Example 9: Should schools implement mandatory dress codes?

• Introduction: The issue of school dress codes often sparks contentious debates regarding self-expression, professionalism, and fostering a suitable learning environment.
• Body Paragraph 1: Implementing mandatory dress codes can promote a sense of unity, reduce peer pressure related to fashion, and minimize distractions.
• Body Paragraph 2: Dress codes can prepare students for future professional settings and teach them the importance of appropriate attire.
• Body Paragraph 3: Critics argue that dress codes limit individual expression and can perpetuate gender stereotypes.
• Refutation: Dress codes can be flexible and inclusive, allowing for self-expression within certain guidelines while still maintaining a suitable environment for learning.
• Conclusion: Implementing dress codes, when thoughtfully designed, can strike a balance between individual expression and maintaining a conducive learning environment.

Example 10: Is online learning as effective as traditional classroom learning?

• Introduction: The rapid growth of online learning has initiated discussions about the efficacy and widespread adoption of this educational format.
• Body Paragraph 1: Online learning provides flexibility, accessibility, and the opportunity for self-paced learning, catering to diverse student needs.
• Body Paragraph 2: Traditional classroom learning promotes face-to-face interactions, immediate feedback, and a sense of community among students.
• Body Paragraph 3: The integration of technology and interactive platforms in online learning can replicate the benefits of classroom settings.
• Counterargument: Critics argue that online learning lacks the social and collaborative aspects of traditional classroom learning.
• Refutation: Online learning can be augmented with virtual discussions, group projects, and video conferencing to foster similar collaborative experiences.
• Conclusion: Online learning, when combined with interactive and collaborative features, can be just as effective, if not more, than traditional classroom learning.

In conclusion, argumentative essays provide opportunities to explore various perspectives on contentious topics and present evidence-based arguments. By examining different viewpoints, rebutting counterarguments, and offering refutations, these essays can contribute to critical thinking and effective communication.

lordsofpaper.org

Nothing is a waste of time if you use the experience wisely

Published by laceyjenkins

Lacey Jenkins is a 29-year-old blogger who writes about education. She has a degree in communications and is currently working on her doctorate in education. She has been writing since she was a teenager and has been published in several magazines and newspapers. View all posts by laceyjenkins

The Roots of Mass Hysteria: Causes of the Salem Witch Trials

This essay is about the causes of the Salem witch trials of 1692. It explores the complex interplay of religious zeal, social and economic tensions, psychological factors, and flawed legal practices that led to the tragic event. The Puritan fear of the devil and witchcraft, combined with local conflicts and the behavior of young girls in Salem Village, created an atmosphere ripe for hysteria. The acceptance of spectral evidence by the courts further fueled the accusations. The essay examines how these elements converged to cause mass hysteria, leading to the execution of twenty people and highlighting the dangers of irrational fear and injustice.

How it works

The Salem witch trials of 1692 persist as one of the most notorious chronicles in American annals, where a progression of judicial inquiries and prosecutions culminated in the execution of twenty individuals, predominantly women, accused of sorcery. The origins of this calamitous event are manifold, entailing a convoluted interplay of societal, theological, and psychological elements. Grasping the incitement of the hysteria in Salem necessitates scrutinizing the temporal context and the distinctive pressures confronting the Puritan community.

At the core of the Salem witch trials was the entrenched theological paradigm that permeated the Puritan existence.

Salem, akin to much of New England, stood as a bastion of Puritan settlement where apprehension of malevolent forces and supernatural phenomena held sway. The Puritans espoused the belief that Satan was actively laboring to undermine their righteous community, and sorcery was deemed an existential menace. This fervent religiosity engendered an environment conducive to allegations of sorcery, particularly in the aftermath of anomalous or inexplicable phenomena.

Economic and social fissures also played a pivotal role in fomenting the witch trials. Salem Village, the epicenter of the accusations, was embroiled in a period of discord and strife. Conflicts over land ownership, grazing rights, and ecclesiastical privileges roiled the village. The community stood divided between advocates for the autonomy of Salem Village from the more affluent Salem Town and those in opposition. These schisms fostered an atmosphere of suspicion and animosity, facilitating the transmutation of personal grievances into accusations of sorcery.

Another contributing factor was the involvement of juveniles and young women in the initial accusations. In January 1692, a cohort of young girls in Salem Village commenced exhibiting peculiar behaviors, including convulsions, contortions, and vocal outbursts. Under interrogation, they professed to be possessed by demonic entities and implicated numerous local women in acts of sorcery. The participation of minors introduced a layer of complexity to the situation. In Puritan society, children were expected to comport themselves dutifully and were often regarded as guileless and truthful. Consequently, the girls’ accusations were accorded considerable credence, and their melodramatic conduct served to exacerbate the hysteria.

Psychological explications also furnish insights into the events in Salem. The phenomenon of collective hysteria, wherein a cohort of individuals manifests analogous symptoms of a psychosomatic disorder, could elucidate the aberrant behaviors exhibited by the accusers. The pervasive stress and trepidation within the community, compounded by the stringent and oppressive social milieu, may have precipitated these psychosomatic manifestations. The girls’ conduct might have constituted a subconscious response to the oppressive circumstances in which they lived, an endeavor to garner attention and assert autonomy in a society that severely circumscribed their agency.

Moreover, the legal and judicial frameworks of the era were ill-equipped to adjudicate such cases. The reliance on “spectral evidence,” wherein accusers purported to witness the apparition or ethereal manifestation of the accused engaging in sorcery, proved particularly problematic. This form of evidence was impervious to refutation and hinged heavily upon the subjective experiences of the accusers. The court’s acceptance of spectral evidence rendered it arduous for the accused to mount a defense once an allegation had been proffered. This legal backdrop facilitated the proliferation of hysteria, as an increasing number of individuals were implicated based on tenuous and fantastical testimony.

The aftermath of the Salem witch trials witnessed a gradual acknowledgment of the grave injustices perpetrated. As the fervor abated, doubts arose regarding the legitimacy of the adjudications and the veracity of the evidence adduced. Prominent figures, including Increase Mather and Samuel Sewall, expressed contrition and censure for the proceedings. In 1697, the Massachusetts General Court designated a day of fasting and introspection in remembrance of the Salem tragedy, and in 1702, the adjudications were deemed unlawful. Restitutions were eventually disbursed to the families of the victims, and the event left an indelible scar on the American collective consciousness.

In summation, the Salem witch trials were an amalgam of theological fervor, socioeconomic discord, psychological influences, and flawed legal methodologies. The adjudications serve as a poignant admonition of the perils of collective hysteria and the imperative of due process and rationality in the face of apprehension and mistrust. By delving into the antecedents of the Salem witch trials, we can glean insights into the unfolding of such a tragic episode and contemplate the lessons it imparts for contemporary society.

Cite this page

The Roots of Mass Hysteria: Causes of the Salem Witch Trials. (2024, May 28). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-roots-of-mass-hysteria-causes-of-the-salem-witch-trials/

"The Roots of Mass Hysteria: Causes of the Salem Witch Trials." PapersOwl.com , 28 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-roots-of-mass-hysteria-causes-of-the-salem-witch-trials/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Roots of Mass Hysteria: Causes of the Salem Witch Trials . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-roots-of-mass-hysteria-causes-of-the-salem-witch-trials/ [Accessed: 29 May. 2024]

"The Roots of Mass Hysteria: Causes of the Salem Witch Trials." PapersOwl.com, May 28, 2024. Accessed May 29, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-roots-of-mass-hysteria-causes-of-the-salem-witch-trials/

"The Roots of Mass Hysteria: Causes of the Salem Witch Trials," PapersOwl.com , 28-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-roots-of-mass-hysteria-causes-of-the-salem-witch-trials/. [Accessed: 29-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Roots of Mass Hysteria: Causes of the Salem Witch Trials . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-roots-of-mass-hysteria-causes-of-the-salem-witch-trials/ [Accessed: 29-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1.7: Introducing an Academic Argument

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 14762

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

In order to better understand the broad strokes of academic argument, we will read and analyze an undergraduate paper about Washington Irving’s short story “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.”Washington Irving, “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” in The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, and the Spectre Bridegroom: From the “Sketch Book” (London: J. B. Lippincott, 1875; University of Virginia Library Electronic Text Center, 2000), etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin...&division=div1 .

Your Process

As you work through this text, these process descriptions will make more sense if you’ve read the literary work under discussion. For this section, you should read Washington Irving’s short story “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.” Our discussion of student research and writing will reveal important plot details that you may want to discover on your own first. You can read this as an e-text provided by the University of Virginia ( etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin...&division=div1 ).

You can also listen to a free audiobook of “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” at Librivox ( http://librivox.org/the-legend-of-sleepy-hollow-by-washington-irving ).

Monica submitted this paper for an introductory literature class after the students read Washington Irving’s “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” during their unit on short fiction. Let’s look at her introduction first:

When one hears the title “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” a reader might shiver a little and think of the infamous spectre, “the apparition of a figure on horseback without a head … known, at all the country firesides, by the name of The Headless Horseman of Sleepy Hollow” (Irving 966). It is this legendary phantom that grants Washington Irving’s tale the label of ghost story. As such, readers would expect the legend to be overflowing with superstition and opposing forces—good vs. evil, known vs. unknown, supernatural vs. reality. “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” is in fact meant to be a tale of opposing forces, but not in the same way as ghost story. It is a legend of rivalry, a rivalry between the characters Ichabod Crane and Brom Van Brunt. Readers must understand that the opposing forces presented here are these two characters, the victim and the victor, the underdog and the front-runner—not those of supernatural and reality—in order to understand the true significance of Irving’s tale. Ichabod Crane and Brom Van Brunt are meant to be more than just two characters with a rivalry—they are actually representations of the young American nation and its “motherland,” Great Britain. When these allegories are understood, and the true opposing forces are revealed, readers will finally be able to understand the ultimate message behind Irving’s tale—it is an allegory for the goals, the problems, and the livelihood of an adolescent America.

After you finish Monica’s introduction, jot down the answer to these questions:

• How does this introduction entice you to read on? What lines grab your attention? Can you articulate why they do?
• Are any of the statements overly strong? “Must” we read the story in this particular way to understand it? Are there ways to tone down the language?
• What do you think will come next in this paper? You have just read “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow”—are there details from the story that you think Monica will cite in the longer paper?

What makes Monica’s introduction so effective? Note first the way she summarizes one way that many readers interpret the story: “readers would expect the legend to be overflowing with superstition and opposing forces—good vs. evil, known vs. unknown, supernatural vs. reality.” In her argument, Monica will challenge this reading, but she does so subtly. “‘The Legend of Sleepy Hollow’ is in fact meant to be a tale of opposing forces,” she writes, “but not in the same way as ghost story.” Monica establishes common ground with those who read the tale as a ghost story, noting that it “ is…a tale of opposing forces .” By working from common ground toward a new understanding of the story, Monica follows the principles of argument laid out by Carl Rogers, a psychologist who insisted that effective argument is based not on conflict, but on compromise and negotiation between reader and writer.

However, a reader may sense that Monica is presenting her reading as the most authoritative or the best interpretation of the story, which can make a reader a bit defensive, especially if he or she does not necessarily agree with Monica’s claim. Notice the subtle revision (highlighted in bold) that makes the opening even more persuasive because it is less totalizing:

When one hears the title “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” a reader might shiver a little and think of the infamous spectre, “the apparition of a figure on horseback without a head … known, at all the country firesides, by the name of The Headless Horseman of Sleepy Hollow” (Irving 966). It is this legendary phantom that grants Washington Irving’s tale the label of ghost story. As such, readers would expect the legend to be overflowing with superstition and opposing forces—good vs. evil, known vs. unknown, supernatural vs. reality. “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” can be read as a tale of opposing forces, but not in the same way as ghost story. It is a legend of rivalry, a rivalry between the characters Ichabod Crane and Brom Van Brunt. Readers may benefit by understand ing that the opposing forces presented here are these two characters, the victim and the victor, the underdog and the front-runner—not those of supernatural and reality—in order to understand a major significance of Irving’s tale. Ichabod Crane and Brom Van Brunt are meant to be more than just two characters with a rivalry—they are actually representations of the young American nation and its “motherland,” Great Britain. When these allegories are understood, and these opposing forces are revealed, readers will finally be able to understand a central message behind Irving’s tale—it is an allegory for the goals, the problems, and the livelihood of an adolescent America.

After establishing the common ground more subtly using the principles of nonthreatening argument , Monica then turns to her own ideas about the story: the tale, she insists, does focus on opposing forces, “ but not in the same way as a ghost story” (our emphasis). Monica prepares the reader for her new claims about “Sleepy Hollow” by shifting her focus from the broad theme of opposition to the specific, nonsupernatural opposition of two characters’ rivalry. She writes, “It is a legend of rivalry, a rivalry between the characters Ichabod Crane and Brom Van Brunt.” Monica introduces a fact from the story—a small piece of textual evidence—that doesn’t quite fit with the common view. Readers who have interpreted “Sleepy Hollow” through the lens of the ghost story want to read on and see how Monica’s focus on rivalry will change their view of Irving’s tale.

Illustration by John Quidor, The Headless Horseman Pursuing Ichabod Crane (1858).

Of course, most readers are skeptical: for each claim a writer makes, readers ask “So what?” Monica answers that “So what?” question by demonstrating a potential problem with her readers’ interpretations of “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.” In the next sentence of her introduction, Monica shows her readers why her interpretation of the story is significant. “Readers must understand,” she writes, “that the opposing forces presented here are these two characters, the victim and the victor, the underdog and the front-runner—not those of supernatural and reality—in order to understand the true significance of Irving’s tale.” Effective introductions to literary interpretations focus on interpretive problems—not for the writer, but for the readers of the paper. Keep in mind that a literary interpretation may not seem significant to every person who reads it. Monica assumes, as you should assume when you write papers for your literature classes, that her readers care about literary works and want to understand them fully and well. For readers who do care about literature, however, the stakes Monica proposes are significant: readers who insist on interpreting “Sleepy Hollow” as a ghost story will miss the tale’s “true significance.”

The University of Virginia provides a number of free modules to help college writers understand the parts of argument we discuss here. To better understand the parts of an effective introduction, you might work through the following modules:

• “Problem Frames Start Here”: http://redschoolhouse.org/drupal/?q=...e/LRSintheWild .
• “Problem Frame Elements”: http://redschoolhouse.org/drupal/?q=...e/LRSintheWild .
• “State the Consequences of a Conceptual Problem by Answering ‘So What?’”: http://redschoolhouse.org/drupal/?q=...s/LRSintheWild .

Once a writer introduces a problem, however, readers expect him or her to also propose a solution to that problem. The first big question readers are likely to ask a writer is, “What do you think?” In the final lines of her introduction, Monica tells her readers what she thinks about this story by making the central claim of her argument. Her claim explains what she believes to be the central opposition in Washington Irving’s “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow”: “Ichabod Crane and Brom Van Brunt are meant to be more than just two characters with a rivalry—they are actually representations of the young American nation and its ‘motherland,’ Great Britain. When these allegories are understood, and the true opposing forces are revealed, readers will finally be able to understand the ultimate message behind Irving’s tale—it is an allegory for the goals, the problems, and the livelihood of an adolescent America.” Monica offers a historicized reading of Irving’s tale (for more on historical theories about literature, see Chapter 7), arguing that the story’s true significance can be found by looking more closely at the time of the story’s composition, when America was an “adolescent” nation still at odds with Great Britain. Monica’s claim is specific, debatable, and significant (at least to readers who care about this story). In the body of her paper, Monica will unpack her claim, using subclaims and reasons to demonstrate to her readers why they should follow her interpretation of the story.

• You can practice developing an effective subclaim using the module “Build Your Argument around a Significant Claim” ( http://redschoolhouse.org/drupal/?q=...t/LRSintheWild ).
• Choose a literary work to analyze, preferably a short story or short lyric poem.
• Develop a working thesis that makes a claim about the work, knowing that this thesis claim may be revised.
• Create an informal outline that highlights the major stages of your argument—the evidence that you will use to support your thesis claim.