rebuttal sentence 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.

• 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

25 Rebuttal Examples

Rebuttal is the process of presenting a counterargument to someone else’s claims or debate points. It is an essential element in the realm of debate and negotiations.

To rebut is not merely to disagree. It needs to be a thoughtful, factual, and logical response to the argument presented.

Some common methods of rebuttal include:

• Fact-checking: Go through the opponent’s fact claims and analyze each one to see if it’s accurate.
• Counterexamples: Provide real-life examples that demonstrate flaws in the opponent’s arguments.
• Ethical dispute: Counter the opponent’s perspective on ethical or moral grounds.

I’ll explore some more methods below.

Rebuttal Examples

1. fact-checking.

Fact-checking simply refers to looking at the series of claims presented by an opponent and seeing if they are factually accurate. You’ll do this by scrutinizing the accuracy of the information presented by the other side. If your opponent’s argument rests on incorrect or inaccurate facts, exposing these inaccuracies can quickly dismantle the structure of their argument.

Example: Suppose your opponent states, “Global warming is a hoax; last winter was extremely cold!” Your rebuttal could be, “Weather and climate are different. Despite a cold winter, long-term data supports global warming.” Here, you’ve used fact-checking to debunk the misleading statement.

2. Counterexamples

Counterexamples involve providing your own examples that challenge the claims made by the opponent. The goal is to offer a scenario or instance that directly contradicts or disproves the opposing argument argument, This can undermine the validity of your opponent, showing how it doesn’t hold up in all real-life circumstances.

Example: If an adversary argues, “All rich people are successful because they have money”, you could provide a counterexample such as, “John is wealthy due to inheritance, but he has not achieved any personal or professional success.” Through this demonstration, you’ve effectively countered the claim being made.

3. Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning is all about using a systematic series of analytical steps to see if each point logically follows from the one before it, with no leaps or gaps. Often, this does require you to look at the points step-by-step, trying to find instances where one point does not logically lead to another. By demonstrating that the opponent’s stance lacks logical coherence, and yours is logical, you can effectively nullify their argument.

Example: Let’s say someone asserts, “Eating ice cream makes you happy. Therefore, if everyone ate ice cream daily, there would be no sadness in the world.” Your rebuttal could involve logical reasoning: “While ice cream might provide a temporary boost, it doesn’t address complex causes of sadness or depression.” In this example, you’ve pointed out the simplistic and illogical nature of the original claim.

See More: Reasoning Examples

4. Highlighting Inconsistencies

This method of rebuttal zeroes in on contradictions within the opponent’s argument. The objective is to capture instances where they have made one point in one instance, and another in the next instance, and those two points contradict each other. Recognizing and pointing out these inconsistencies can demonstrate a weakness in their viewpoints and invalidate their overall argument.

Example: Suppose an opponent argues, “Cutting taxes stimulates business growth and should be applied universally,” but then contradicts themselves by stating, “Government services like healthcare and education need more funding.” By calling out the inconsistency between wanting lower taxes but more public services, you successfully weaken their argument.

5. Reductio ad Absurdum

Reductio ad Absurdum means “reducing an argument to absurdity”. This method involves taking the opponent’s argument to its most extreme logical conclusion and pointing out how irrational or implausible that conclusion would be. By doing so, this makes the other side’s argument appear unreasonable or nonsensical.

Example: Assume an opponent’s claim is, “Everyone should be allowed to say whatever they want, whenever they want, as an exercise of free speech.” Your rebuttal using reductio ad absurdum could be: “By that logic, should someone be allowed to falsely yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater because of free speech? Surely that would lead to unnecessary panic and potential danger.”

See More: Reductio ad Absurdum Examples

6. Empirical Evidence

Empirical evidence puts forth real-world, verifiable data as a counterpoint to an opponent’s argument. It involves using objective facts, measurement, or observations to directly contest a claim. The strength of this form of rebuttal is that it appeals to tangible and measurable information that is difficult to refute, especially if it’s based on the scientific method.

Example: If an opponent argues, “Schools with standardized uniforms perform better academically,” you could counter with empirical evidence: “Many top-scoring countries in international education ranking, such as Finland, do not mandate school uniforms.”

See More: Empirical Evidence Examples

7. Expert Testimony

Calling on expert testimony as a form of rebuttal means citing a specialist or a professional to disprove the opponent’s argument. This could be a scientist, an academic, a historian, or any acknowledged authority on the topic being discussed. Their words typically carry weight due to their expertise in the field and can debunk the opposing argument, adding credibility to your own. But be careful of the appeal to authority fallacy – make sure the expert is actually an expert in the field, with strong evidence backing them.

Example: In a debate on climate change, if someone claims that “Climate change is cyclical and not significantly impacted by human activities,” you could rebut with expert testimony from reputable climate scientists: “Overwhelming consensus in the scientific community supports the fact that human activities, particularly carbon emissions, play a major role in accelerating climate change.”

8. Precedent

When using precedent as a rebuttal, your goal is to demonstrate that past events do not support the opponent’s claims. This might refer to exemplar events, past rulings in courts, past research, and any other established facts that could counter an opposing argument. If an opponent’s point is unprecedented or contradicts what has worked before, pointing out such an inconsistency can be an effective rebuttal.

Example: If an opponent argues that “The death penalty is an effective means to control crime,” you could rebut based on precedent: “Numerous studies based on precedents, such as states without the death penalty experiencing lower crime rates, indicate that the death penalty does not effectively deter crime.”

An analogy is a form of rebuttal where you draw a parallel with another situation to demonstrate flaws or absurdity in the opponent’s arguments. By pulling in an example that’s easy for audiences to understand, you can clearly show why the contrasting argument might not hold water.

Example: If your adversary insists, “We shouldn’t take action on climate change unless all countries agree to work together,” you could illustrate the weakness of this argument with an analogy: “If your roof was leaking, would you wait for your neighbors’ roofs to leak before you fixed yours? No, you’d take action immediately.”

10. Reframing the Argument

Reframing your opponent’s argument involves changing the perspective or emphasis of the conversation in order to challenge their standpoint. According to this tactic, you contest not necessarily the points made by your opponent, but the way they’ve chosen to present it. By putting the argument into another context or highlighting a different aspect of the problem, this method offers a fresh viewpoint to the audience.

Example: If an opponent asserts, “Cutting down on meat consumption hurts the farming industry,” your reframing could be: “We should be focusing on how the farming industry can adapt and grow more sustainable practices, which is a more reasonable solution to this problem.”

11. Pointing Out Fallacies

This rebuttal technique involves calling attention to logical fallacies—an error in reasoning—in the opponent’s argument. Logical Fallacies can often sound persuasive, but they tend to crumble under close scrutiny. By pointing them out, you show the audience that the argument being made is not as sound as it appears to be.

Example: If an opponent claims, “Most famous writers were heavy drinkers, so drinking must enhance creativity,” you could counter by highlighting the fallacy of the argument: “That’s a correlation-causation fallacy. It incorrectly assumes that being a heavy drinker leads to creativity, neglecting other factors like hard work or innate talent.”

See More: The Types of Fallacies

12. Historical Context

This form of rebuttal invokes history to challenge an opponent’s argument. Here, you draw examples from past events or periods to refute their claims or show that their argument is not compatible with historical accounts. It emphasizes how understanding context can change the meaning or implications of an argument. This is similar to precedent , outlined above.

Example: If someone posits, “The colonization period allowed for the spread of civilization to other parts of the world,” you could challenge this with historical context: “Your claim overlooks the many atrocities, human rights abuses, and cultural erasures that also took place during colonization.”

See More: Historical Context Examples

13. Ethical/Moral Grounds

This rebuttal method involves challenging the ethical or moral stance taken by the opponent in their argument. It is often used when the debate revolves around issues of moral judgement or ethical choices. The key here is to show that the opponent’s argument contradicts widely accepted moral or ethical standards.

Example: If an opponent declares, “It’s acceptable to test cosmetics on animals because it ensures the safety of the product for human use,” you could respond on ethical grounds: “Animal testing relies on causing harm to sentient beings, which many consider to be an unethical practice, regardless of the intended outcomes.”

See More: Ethical Dilemma Examples

14. Clarifying Definitions

This rebuttal strategy aims to disprove an opponent’s argument by clarifying or disputing the definitions of terms or concepts they have used. The goal is to expose any incorrect or misunderstood use of these terms, which may be the basis for their contention. Establishing a shared understanding of the terms being used often leads to generating more precise arguments.

Example: If an opponent argues, “Homeschooling is neglectful because it isolates children,” you could challenge their definition of homeschooling: “This contention is based on a misconception. Homeschooled children often interact with peers in community activities, cooperative learning endeavors, sports teams, and volunteer work.”

15. Challenging Assumptions

Challenging the assumptions of your opponent’s argument involves exposing and addressing the baseless or unsupported claims they have made. Such assumptions often underpin the core of their argument, and tearing them down can effectively challenge their stance.

Example: In a debate on public transport, if an opponent asserts, “Public transportation will always be less efficient than private cars,” you could challenge the underlying assumption, stating, “Your argument assumes all public transit is inefficient. Many cities globally have efficient, well-managed public transport systems.”

See More: Assumptions Examples

16. Demonstrating Bias

Demonstrating bias is a form of rebuttal where you show that your opponent’s argument may be rooted in personal or institutional bias. The bias could skew the evidence they present or the way they interpret it. Providing evidence of these biases may discredit your opponent’s argument, illustrating that it’s not derived from balanced analysis.

Example: If an opponent cites an article from a known politically biased journalist, arguing, “According to this article, cutting environmental regulations promotes industrial growth,” you can rebut by demonstrating bias: “We should consider the source of this article, the journalist has a record of arguing for deregulation and could be presenting the information with an inherent bias.”

See More: A List of Types of Bias

17. Questioning Sources

Questioning sources involves examining the credibility and reliability of the information that your opponent presents in their argument. In the era of rampant misinformation, it has become increasingly necessary to verify sources of information. By questioning the legitimacy of your opponent’s sources, you can potentially undermine their argument.

Example: If an opponent uses a social media post to support their argument, “A post on Facebook revealed that vaccines cause autism,” you could question the source, asserting, “Social media posts are not credible sources of health information. Reputable scientific studies repeatedly confirm that there is no link between vaccines and autism.”

See More: Best Sources to Cite in Essays

18. Comparative Analysis

Comparative analysis as a rebuttal involves comparing the opponent’s argument or case to another scenario or instance where the outcomes were different, thus disproving their claim. It’s about taking a similar but not identical situation and drawing relevant conclusions.

Example: If your opponent insists, “A strict dress code in the office improves productivity,” you could employ a comparative analysis: “Tech companies like Google and Facebook, known for their relaxed dress codes, have consistently ranked high in productivity.”

19. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis revolves around using empirical data, numbers, and statistics to disprove an opponent’s argument. Well-conducted research yields statistics that represent factual, quantifiable evidence which can be persuasive in a debate.

Example: If an opponent claims, “Children who watch more TV perform worse academically,” your rebuttal could involve statistical analysis: “A recent large-scale study showed no significant correlation between time spent watching TV and academic performance, once controlled for other factors like socioeconomic status and parental education level.”

20. Exposing Oversimplifications

Oversimplifications often occur when an opponent reduces a complex problem into an overly simple cause and effect relation. Tackling such oversimplifications requires you to expose the inherent complexity of the issue, highlighting that reality is more nuanced than the opponent’s portrayal.

Example: If an opponent posits, “Unemployment is simply due to laziness”, your rebuttal could be, “Such a claim dramatically oversimplifies a multifaceted issue. Unemployment can be caused by various economic factors such as automation, outsourcing, and economic downturns.”

See More: Oversimplification Examples

21. Highlighting Missing Information

Missing information, or gaps in information, can weaken an argument. If you can identify and point out this missing information, it can undermine the validity of the opponent’s argument, leading to a powerful rebuttal.

Example: Should your adversary argue, “Banning soft drinks in schools will solve the obesity problem,” your counter-argument could highlight missing information: “This argument overlooks other more significant aspects of diet and lifestyle, such as the foods parents put in children’s lunch boxes.”

22. Demonstrating Irrelevance

Demonstrating irrelevance involves showing that the opponent’s argument or a part of it is not relevant to the issue at hand. This can be a formidable rebuttal strategy as it invalidates the opponent’s argument without necessarily proving it wrong. This is related to pointing out the red herring fallacy in an opponent’s argument.

Example: If someone argues, “Solar energy will never work because it’s not always sunny,” you could demonstrate irrelevance: “Modern solar energy systems store power for use during cloudy days or nights, making this argument irrelevant.”

23. Pointing Out Contradictions

Pointing out contradictions involves identifying and spotlighting points in an opponent’s argument that contradict each other. This approach is potent because it shows a lack of coherence in the other side’s argument, which undermines its strength and credibility.

Example: If an opponent argues, “We should focus on developing green energy to combat climate change, yet we must continue to support coal industries for job preservation,” you could expose the contradiction: “Your argument contradicts itself because promoting coal industries undermines the push towards green energy, which you acknowledge is crucial for combating climate change.”

See More: Contradiction Examples

24. Challenging the Significance

This technique disputes the importance or relevance of the points presented by your opponent. Even if their facts are correct, you may argue that they are insignificant in the broader context of the issue at hand, thus deflating the impact of their argument.

Example: In a debate about healthy diets, if someone states, “Quinoa is expensive, so eating healthy is not affordable,” you could counter by challenging the significance: “While quinoa may be costly, there are many affordable healthy eating options, like fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. So, the cost of quinoa is not representative of a healthy diet’s overall cost.”

25. Using Humor or Satire

While this method requires a careful touch and a responsive audience, using humor or satire can be an effective way to disassemble an opponent’s argument. By making light of the situation or the argument, you can create a connection with the audience and subtly chip away at the integrity of the opponent’s case.

Example: Suppose an opponent argues, “People should stop using the internet because it’s filled with false information.” In response, you could say, “Well, if we avoided everything with a little bit of false information, we’d never be able to watch a superhero movie or read a fairy tale again.”

The skill of rebuttal is essential for good debaters. But be careful to ensure your rebuttals are sound and foolproof. You don’t want to fall into the same traps as your opponent, but engaging with logical fallacies or flawed arguments. Select rebuttals that steelman your case while helping to cast doubt and uncertainty in the points of your opponents.

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/ 15 Animism Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 10 Magical Thinking Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Social-Emotional Learning (Definition, Examples, Pros & Cons)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is Educational Psychology?

1 thought on “25 Rebuttal Examples”

Another helpful and simple to understand publication by Chris. I have learnt so much from reading Professor Chris numerous articles online and I love this latest article with examples. Thank you.

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

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

• Customer Reviews
• Extended Essays
• IB Internal Assessment
• Theory of Knowledge
• Literature Review
• Dissertations
• Essay Writing
• Research Writing
• Assignment Help
• Capstone Projects
• College Application
• Online Class

What is Rebuttal in an Argumentative Essay? (How to Write It)

by  Antony W

April 7, 2022

Even if you have the most convincing evidence and reasons to explain your position on an issue, there will still be people in your audience who will not agree with you.

Usually, this creates an opportunity for counterclaims, which requires a response through rebuttal. So what exactly is rebuttal in an argumentative essay?

A rebuttal in an argumentative essay is a response you give to your opponent’s argument to show that the position they currently hold on an issue is wrong. While you agree with their counterargument, you point out the flaws using the strongest piece of evidence to strengthen your position. 

To be clear, it’s hard to write an argument on an issue without considering counterclaim and rebuttals in the first place.

If you think about it, debatable topics require a consideration of both sides of an issue, which is why it’s important to learn about counterclaims and rebuttals in argumentative writing.

What is a Counterclaim in an Argument? 

To understand why rebuttal comes into play in an argumentative essay, you first have to know what a counterclaim is and why it’s important in writing.

A counterclaim is an argument that an opponent makes to weaken your thesis. In particular, counterarguments try to show why your argument’s claim is wrong and try to propose an alternative to what you stand for.

From a writing standpoint, you have to recognize the counterclaims presented by the opposing side.

In fact, argumentative writing requires you to look at the two sides of an issue even if you’ve already taken a strong stance on it.

There are a number of benefits of including counterarguments in your argumentative essay:

• It shows your instructor that you’ve looked into both sides of the argument and recognize that some readers may not share your views initially.
• You create an opportunity to provide a strong rebuttal to the counterclaims, so readers see them before they finish reading the essay.
• You end up strengthening your writing because the essay turns out more objective than it would without recognizing the counterclaims from the opposing side.

What is Rebuttal in Argumentative Essay? 

Your opponent will always look for weaknesses in your argument and try the best they can to show that you’re wrong.

Since you have solid grounds that your stance on an issue is reasonable, truthful, or more meaningful, you have to give a solid response to the opposition.

This is where rebuttal comes in.

In argumentative writing, rebuttal refers to the answer you give directly to an opponent in response to their counterargument. The answer should be a convincing explanation that shows an opponent why and/or how they’re wrong on an issue.

How to Write a Rebuttal Paragraph in Argumentative Essay

Now that you understand the connection between a counterclaim and rebuttal in an argumentative writing, let’s look at some approaches that you can use to refute your opponent’s arguments.

1. Point Out the Errors in the Counterargument

You’ve taken a stance on an issue for a reason, and mostly it’s because you believe yours is the most reasonable position based on the data, statistics, and the information you’ve collected.

Now that there’s a counterargument that tries to challenge your position, you can refute it by mentioning the flaws in it.

It’s best to analyze the counterargument carefully. Doing so will make it easy for you to identify the weaknesses, which you can point out and use the strongest points for rebuttal

2. Give New Points that Contradict the Counterclaims 

Imagine yourself in a hall full of debaters. On your left side is an audience that agrees with your arguable claim and on your left is a group of listeners who don’t buy into your argument.

Your opponents in the room are not holding back, especially because they’re constantly raising their hands to question your information.

To win them over in such a situation, you have to play smart by recognizing their stance on the issue but then explaining why they’re wrong.

Now, take a closer look at the structure of an argument . You’ll notice that it features a section for counterclaims, which means you have to address them if your essay must stand out. 

Here, it’s ideal to recognize and agree with the counterargument that the opposing side presents. Then, present a new point of view or facts that contradict the arguments.

Doing so will get the opposing side to consider your stance, even if they don’t agree with you entirely.

3. Twist Facts in Favor of Your Argument 

Sometimes the other side of the argument may make more sense than yours does. However, that doesn’t mean you have to concede entirely.

You can agree with the other side of the argument, but then twist facts and provide solid evidence to suit your argument.

This strategy can work for just about any topic, including the most complicated or controversial ones that you have never dealt with before.

4. Making an Emotional Plea 

Making an emotional plea isn’t a powerful rebuttal strategy, but it can also be a good option to consider.

It’s important to make sure that the emotional appeal you make outweighs the argument that your opponent brings forth.

Given that it’s often the least effective option in most arguments, making an emotional appeal should be a last resort if all the other options fail.

Final Thoughts 

As you can see, counterclaims are important in an argumentative essay and there’s more than one way to give your rebuttal.

Whichever approach you use, make sure you use the strongest facts, stats, evidence, or argument to prove that your position on an issue makes more sense that what your opponents currently hold.

Lastly, if you feel like your essay topic is complicated and you have only a few hours to complete the assignment, you can get in touch with Help for Assessment and we’ll point you in the right direction so you get your essay done right.

About the author 

Antony W is a professional writer and coach at Help for Assessment. He spends countless hours every day researching and writing great content filled with expert advice on how to write engaging essays, research papers, and assignments.

How to Write a Rebuttal Essay — An Easy Guide to Follow

Ever wondered how to write a rebuttal essay? Face this academic assignment for the first time and can’t find an understandable guide to follow? Don’t worry because here you’ll find a detailed guideline allowing you to set the record straight and understand what tips to follow while writing. We’ll take a look at all the aspects of writing, check what rebuttal in an essay is and list all tips to follow.

What Is a Rebuttal in an Essay — Simple Explanation

Academicians also call this form of writing a counter-argument essay. Its principal mission is to respond to some points made by a person. If you render a decision to answer one or another argument, you should present a rebuttal which is also known as a counter-argument. Otherwise stated, it is a simple attempt to disprove some statements by suggesting a counter-argument.

At a glance, this task seems to be quite challenging. However, rebuttal argument essay writing doesn’t take a massive amount of time. You just need to air your personal opinion on one or another situation.

Related essays:

• Economic recession essay
• Hamlet & formal structure
• The counter revolution and the 1960s essay
• Viacom Strategic Analysis essay

Nevertheless, your viewpoint should be based on your research and comprise a strong thesis statement. An excellent essay can even change the opinion of the intended audience. Thus, you need to be very attentive while writing and use only strong and double-checked arguments.

How to Do a Rebuttal in an Essay — Useful Tutorial

Firstly, you should conduct simple research before you start expressing your ideas. Don’t tend to procrastinate this task because it is tough to organize your thoughts when your deadline is dangerously close. If you don’t have a desire to spend the whole night poring over the books, it is better to start processing the literature as soon as possible. It would be great if you subdivide this task into a few sections. As a result, it will be easier to work!

The majority of academicians have not the slightest idea how to answer the question of how to start a rebuttal in an essay. In sober fact, you need to start with a strong introduction, comprising a thesis statement. Besides, your introductory part should explain what particular situation you are going to discuss. Your core audience should look it through and immediately understand what position you desire to explore.

You should create a list of claims and build your essay structure in the way allowing you to explain each claim one by one. Writing a rebuttal essay, you should follow a pre-written outline. As a result, you won’t face difficulties with the structure.

For instance, there is a particular situation, and you don’t agree with it. You wish to prove the targeted audience that your idea is correct. In this scenario, you need to state your opinion in a thesis statement and list all counter-arguments one by one.

Each rebuttal paragraph should be short and complete. Besides, you should avoid making too general statements because your targeted audience won’t understand what you mean. If you wish to air your proof-point, you should try to make more precise arguments. As a result, your readers won’t face difficulties trying to understand what you mean.

Rebuttal Essay Outline — Why Should You Create It

As well as any other academic paper, this one also should have a plan to follow. Your rebuttal essay outline is a sterling opportunity to organize your thoughts and create an approximate plan to follow. Commonly, your outline should look like this:

• Short but informative introduction with a thesis statement (just a few sentences).
• 3 or 5 body paragraphs presenting all counter-arguments.
• Strong conclusion where you should repeat your opinion once again.

For you not to forget some ideas, we highly recommend writing a list of all claims you wish to discuss in all paragraphs. Even if you are a seasoned writer who is engaged in this area and deals with creative assignments on a rolling basis, you won’t regret it. You’ll spend a few minutes creating the outline, but the general content of your essay will be considerably better.

Top-7 Rebuttal Essay Topics for Students

If you really can’t render a correct decision and pick a worthy topic, look through the rebuttal essay ideas published below. You can’t go wrong if you choose one of the below-listed ideas:

• Is it necessary to sentence juveniles to life imprisonment?
• Why are electro cars better for the environment?
• Distance learning is more effective than the traditional approach to education.
• Why should animal testing be forbidden?
• Modern drones can help police solve the crimes faster.
• Why should smoking marijuana be prohibited?
• Why should the screentime of kids be limited?

We hope our tips will help you catch the inspiration and create a compelling essay which will make your audience think of the discussed problem and even change their minds.

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

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

Rebuttals and Refutations

 introduction to rebuttal and refutation of counterargument.

An integral part of composing a strong argument is including a counterargument. This can be difficult, especially if a writer is arguing for a position s/he already agrees with. In such cases, writers can sometimes make good points to support their stances; however, their arguments are vulnerable unless they anticipate and address counterarguments. When a writer does this, it is often referred to as rebuttal or refutation. Some scholars of rhetoric differentiate the two words in terms of whether you can actually disprove a claim or just argue against it; however, in this section, we will use the terms as basically interchangeable to help get you more used to their function in argument. When writers are able to skillfully rebut or refute a view that runs counter to their claims, it strengthens their work. Rebuttal and refutation are common in all types of arguments, including academic arguments. As you complete more advanced work in college, you will be expected to address counterargument often. And while you might not always need to or be able to prove that other points of view are wrong, you may at least need to try to argue against them.

Formula for Refutation and Rebuttal

Though writers may handle rebuttal and refutation in different ways, there is a formula for success in academic argument. Here are the key parts of that formula:

Accurately represent opposing viewpoints

If you don’t accurately and thoroughly represent opposing viewpoints in your own writing, some of your potential audience will automatically be turned off. Good rebuttal and refutation begins with a solid understanding of all possible points of view on your topic. That may mean you even need to acknowledge and accommodate opposing points of view. Acknowledging other views shows you are aware of ideas that run counter to your claims. You will almost always be expected to at least acknowledge such views in your work. You may also, though, need to accommodate opposing views, especially if many people see them as reasonable. If, for example, you were writing a piece arguing that students should take a gap year between high school and college, it would benefit your work to acknowledge that a gap year isn’t realistic for or even desired by all students. You may further accommodate this other view by explaining how some students may thrive in the structure that school provides and would gain by going directly from high school to college. Remember that even if you cannot prove positions that counter your own are wrong, you can still use rebuttal and refutation to show why they might be problematic, flawed, or just not as good as another possible position for some people.

Use a respectful, non-incendiary tone

It doesn’t help the writer’s cause to offend, upset, or alienate potential readers, even those who hold differing views. Treating all potential readers with respect and avoiding words or phrases that belittle people and/or their views will help you get your points across more effectively. For example, if you are writing a paper on why America would benefit from a third viable major political party, it will not help your cause to write that “Republicans are dumb, and Democrats are whiny.” First, those claims are too general. But even if they weren’t, they won’t help your cause. If you choose to break down the perceived problems with members of political parties, you must do so in a way that is as respectful as possible. Calling someone a name or insulting them (directly or indirectly) is very rarely a successful strategy in argument.

Use reliable information in your rebuttal/refutation

Always be sure to carefully check the ideas or claims you make in rebutting a counterargument. The brain is not an infallible computer, and there are instances when we think we know information is accurate but it isn’t. Sometimes we know a lot about a particular subject but we get information confused or time has changed things a bit. Additionally, we may be tempted to use a source that backs up our ideas perfectly, but it might not be the most reputable, credible, or up-to-date place for information. Don’t assume you just have all of the information to shoot down counterarguments. Use your knowledge, but also do thorough research, double- and triple-check information, and look for sources that are likely to carry weight with readers. For example, it is widely assumed that bulls are attracted to the color red; however, in reality, bulls are colorblind, so what many people assume as fact is incorrect. Be thorough so you have confidence in your claims when you are rebutting/refuting and likewise when you are attempting to prevent yourself from being open to rebuttal/refutation.

Use qualifying words when applicable

Qualifying words are terms such as “many,” “most,” “some,” “might,” “rarely,” “doubtful,” “often,” etc. You get the point. These are words that don’t lock you into a claim that could be easily refuted and that can help you more easily rebut counterarguments. For example, if someone says, “Nobody dies of tuberculosis anymore,” we might get the point that it isn’t as common as it used to be. Still, it isn’t an accurate statement, and a more precise way to phrase such a claim would be to qualify it: “Not many people die each year in America from tuberculosis.” You might not always need to use qualifying terms. If you are making a point that is absolute, feel free to make it strongly; however, if there is a need to give your claim more flexibility, use qualifying words to help you.

Now let’s take a look at examples of rebuttal and refutation to further your understanding:

Download the PDF of these examples.

Felix is writing his argument paper on why his university should not have cut funding to the school’s library. His arguable thesis reads as follows: Because Northern State University has a mission statement that includes becoming a Research 1 (R1) institution, full funding should be restored to the library to ensure faculty and students have adequate resources to enhance their research agendas.

Felix has done his research, and he knows that a couple of the main counterarguments are that the school needs funds to renovate the student union and to construct a new building for the Engineering Department. Thus, he can anticipate counterarguments and include them in his paper. While Felix cannot prove beyond doubt that the school should use more funding for the library instead of addressing other needs, he can try to make the case.

Read over Felix’s passage below to see how he strengthens his case, and note the annotations to help you see parts of the formula in action:

Notice how each student has a different goal and approach, yet they both still use parts of the formula to help them accomplish their rhetorical aims.

UNM Core Writing OER Collection Copyright © 2023 by University of New Mexico is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

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

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.

• 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.

9.3: The Argumentative Essay

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 58378
• Lumen Learning

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Learning Objectives

• Examine types of argumentative essays

Argumentative Essays

You may have heard it said that all writing is an argument of some kind. Even if you’re writing an informative essay, you still have the job of trying to convince your audience that the information is important. However, there are times you’ll be asked to write an essay that is specifically an argumentative piece.

An argumentative essay is one that makes a clear assertion or argument about some topic or issue. When you’re writing an argumentative essay, it’s important to remember that an academic argument is quite different from a regular, emotional argument. Note that sometimes students forget the academic aspect of an argumentative essay and write essays that are much too emotional for an academic audience. It’s important for you to choose a topic you feel passionately about (if you’re allowed to pick your topic), but you have to be sure you aren’t too emotionally attached to a topic. In an academic argument, you’ll have a lot more constraints you have to consider, and you’ll focus much more on logic and reasoning than emotions.

Argumentative essays are quite common in academic writing and are often an important part of writing in all disciplines. You may be asked to take a stand on a social issue in your introduction to writing course, but you could also be asked to take a stand on an issue related to health care in your nursing courses or make a case for solving a local environmental problem in your biology class. And, since argument is such a common essay assignment, it’s important to be aware of some basic elements of a good argumentative essay.

When your professor asks you to write an argumentative essay, you’ll often be given something specific to write about. For example, you may be asked to take a stand on an issue you have been discussing in class. Perhaps, in your education class, you would be asked to write about standardized testing in public schools. Or, in your literature class, you might be asked to argue the effects of protest literature on public policy in the United States.

However, there are times when you’ll be given a choice of topics. You might even be asked to write an argumentative essay on any topic related to your field of study or a topic you feel that is important personally.

Whatever the case, having some knowledge of some basic argumentative techniques or strategies will be helpful as you write. Below are some common types of arguments.

Causal Arguments

• In this type of argument, you argue that something has caused something else. For example, you might explore the causes of the decline of large mammals in the world’s ocean and make a case for your cause.

Evaluation Arguments

• In this type of argument, you make an argumentative evaluation of something as “good” or “bad,” but you need to establish the criteria for “good” or “bad.” For example, you might evaluate a children’s book for your education class, but you would need to establish clear criteria for your evaluation for your audience.

Proposal Arguments

• In this type of argument, you must propose a solution to a problem. First, you must establish a clear problem and then propose a specific solution to that problem. For example, you might argue for a proposal that would increase retention rates at your college.

Narrative Arguments

• In this type of argument, you make your case by telling a story with a clear point related to your argument. For example, you might write a narrative about your experiences with standardized testing in order to make a case for reform.

Rebuttal Arguments

• In a rebuttal argument, you build your case around refuting an idea or ideas that have come before. In other words, your starting point is to challenge the ideas of the past.

Definition Arguments

• In this type of argument, you use a definition as the starting point for making your case. For example, in a definition argument, you might argue that NCAA basketball players should be defined as professional players and, therefore, should be paid.

https://assessments.lumenlearning.co...essments/20277

Essay Examples

• Click here to read an argumentative essay on the consequences of fast fashion . Read it and look at the comments to recognize strategies and techniques the author uses to convey her ideas.
• In this example, you’ll see a sample argumentative paper from a psychology class submitted in APA format. Key parts of the argumentative structure have been noted for you in the sample.

Link to Learning

For more examples of types of argumentative essays, visit the Argumentative Purposes section of the Excelsior OWL .

Contributors and Attributions

• Argumentative Essay. Provided by : Excelsior OWL. Located at : https://owl.excelsior.edu/rhetorical-styles/argumentative-essay/ . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image of a man with a heart and a brain. Authored by : Mohamed Hassan. Provided by : Pixabay. Located at : pixabay.com/illustrations/decision-brain-heart-mind-4083469/. License : Other . License Terms : pixabay.com/service/terms/#license

Usage and Examples of a Rebuttal

Weakening an Opponent's Claim With Facts

David Hume Kennerly/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

• 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

A rebuttal takes on a couple of different forms. As it pertains to an argument or debate, the definition of a rebuttal is the presentation of evidence and reasoning meant to weaken or undermine an opponent's claim. However, in persuasive speaking, a rebuttal is typically part of a discourse with colleagues and rarely a stand-alone speech.

Rebuttals are used in law, public affairs, and politics, and they're in the thick of effective public speaking. They also can be found in academic publishing, editorials, letters to the editor, formal responses to personnel matters, or customer service complaints/reviews. A rebuttal is also called a counterargument.

Types and Occurrences of Rebuttals

Rebuttals can come into play during any kind of argument or occurrence where someone has to defend a position contradictory to another opinion presented. Evidence backing up the rebuttal position is key.

Formally, students use rebuttal in debate competitions. In this arena, rebuttals don't make new arguments , just battle the positions already presented in a specific, timed format. For example, a rebuttal may get four minutes after an argument is presented in eight.

In academic publishing, an author presents an argument in a paper, such as on a work of literature, stating why it should be seen in a particular light. A rebuttal letter about the paper can find the flaws in the argument and evidence cited, and present contradictory evidence. If a writer of a paper has the paper rejected for publishing by the journal, a well-crafted rebuttal letter can give further evidence of the quality of the work and the due diligence taken to come up with the thesis or hypothesis.

In law, an attorney can present a rebuttal witness to show that a witness on the other side is in error. For example, after the defense has presented its case, the prosecution can present rebuttal witnesses. This is new evidence only and witnesses that contradict defense witness testimony. An effective rebuttal to a closing argument in a trial can leave enough doubt in the jury's minds to have a defendant found not guilty.

In public affairs and politics, people can argue points in front of the local city council or even speak in front of their state government. Our representatives in Washington present diverging points of view on bills up for debate . Citizens can argue policy and present rebuttals in the opinion pages of the newspaper.

On the job, if a person has a complaint brought against him to the human resources department, that employee has a right to respond and tell his or her side of the story in a formal procedure, such as a rebuttal letter.

In business, if a customer leaves a poor review of service or products on a website, the company's owner or a manager will, at minimum, need to diffuse the situation by apologizing and offering a concession for goodwill. But in some cases, a business needs to be defended. Maybe the irate customer left out of the complaint the fact that she was inebriated and screaming at the top of her lungs when she was asked to leave the shop. Rebuttals in these types of instances need to be delicately and objectively phrased.

Characteristics of an Effective Rebuttal

"If you disagree with a comment, explain the reason," says Tim Gillespie in "Doing Literary Criticism." He notes that "mocking, scoffing, hooting, or put-downs reflect poorly on your character and on your point of view. The most effective rebuttal to an opinion with which you strongly disagree is an articulate counterargument."

Rebuttals that rely on facts are also more ethical than those that rely solely on emotion or diversion from the topic through personal attacks on the opponent. That is the arena where politics, for example, can stray from trying to communicate a message into becoming a reality show.

With evidence as the central focal point, a good rebuttal relies on several elements to win an argument, including a clear presentation of the counterclaim, recognizing the inherent barrier standing in the way of the listener accepting the statement as truth, and presenting evidence clearly and concisely while remaining courteous and highly rational.

The evidence, as a result, must do the bulk work of proving the argument while the speaker should also preemptively defend certain erroneous attacks the opponent might make against it.

That is not to say that a rebuttal can't have an emotional element, as long as it works with evidence. A statistic about the number of people filing for bankruptcy per year due to medical debt can pair with a story of one such family as an example to support the topic of health care reform. It's both illustrative — a more personal way to talk about dry statistics — and an appeal to emotions.

To prepare an effective rebuttal, you need to know your opponent's position thoroughly to be able to formulate the proper attacks and to find evidence that dismantles the validity of that viewpoint. The first speaker will also anticipate your position and will try to make it look erroneous.

You will need to show:

• Contradictions in the first argument
• Terminology that's used in a way in order to sway opinion ( bias ) or used incorrectly. For example, when polls were taken about "Obamacare," people who didn't view the president favorably were more likely to want the policy defeated than when the actual name of it was presented as the Affordable Care Act.
• Errors in cause and effect
• Poor sources or misplaced authority
• Examples in the argument that are flawed or not comprehensive enough
• Flaws in the assumptions that the argument is based on
• Claims in the argument that are without proof or are widely accepted without actual proof. For example, alcoholism is defined by society as a disease. However, there isn't irrefutable medical proof that it is a disease like diabetes, for instance. Alcoholism manifests itself more like behavioral disorders, which are psychological.

The more points in the argument that you can dismantle, the more effective your rebuttal. Keep track of them as they're presented in the argument, and go after as many of them as you can.

Refutation Definition

The word rebuttal can be used interchangeably with refutation , which includes any contradictory statement in an argument. Strictly speaking, the distinction between the two is that a rebuttal must provide evidence, whereas a refutation merely relies on a contrary opinion. They differ in legal and argumentation contexts, wherein refutation involves any counterargument, while rebuttals rely on contradictory evidence to provide a means for a counterargument.

A successful refutation may disprove evidence with reasoning, but rebuttals must present evidence.

• 4 Fast Debate Formats for the Secondary Classroom
• Definition and Examples of Praeteritio (Preteritio) in Rhetoric
• What Is a Critique in Composition?
• AP English Exam: 101 Key Terms
• Definition and Examples of an Ad Hominem Fallacy
• Ethos, Logos, Pathos for Persuasion
• Tips on Winning the Debate on Evolution
• What Does Argumentation Mean?
• What Is the Straw Man Fallacy?
• Overview of the Jury Trial Stage of a Criminal Case
• Reductio Ad Absurdum in Argument
• Use Social Media to Teach Ethos, Pathos and Logos
• What Does It Mean to Make a Claim During an Argument?
• Stage a Debate in Class
• Definition and Examples of Evidence in Argument

How To Write A Rebuttal In An Essay

What is a rebuttal in writing.

When writing an essay, rebutting is one way to argue points or facts that have been stated. It will directly oppose any view and will include reasons for your claims being valid. When including this in an essay, you will be acknowledging what the opposition is saying, but will continue to argue your own points. Here, you can see how to write a good rebuttal that will be easy to understand while getting your point across.

Why Are Rebuttal Paragraphs Important?

When planning to include a rebuttal in an argumentative essay, it is essential to know how to write a rebuttal paragraph. Students should plan an outline for an argumentative essay and know where to place these paragraphs. These are used for arguing points that have been made. They will appear after the main argument in an essay. When working on these paragraphs, it is important for there to be evidence that supports your arguments.

These paragraphs will introduce your opposing argument and will also acknowledge that some parts of the opposition are valid points. It will also be used for introducing the conclusion of the essay. Learning how to include these paragraphs is not always an easy task. If you need help with your essay, you can hire an argumentative essay writer that has experience including counterarguments. With professional help, students can create a powerful argument that will attract the attention of the reader and be backed with evidence.

How to Start Refuting

To get started, a three-part organization process should be used. You must have a complete understanding of the opposing viewpoint. Know who the intended audience is, what message is being sent, and what points you agree with. You will then analyze the argument and determine your position. The argument may contain untrue statements or claims that cannot be verified.

Additional research will then have to be performed. You need to back up your statements with facts and evidence when you write a counterargument. It will be important to fact-check any of the opposition’s arguments and collect reliable data that can disprove these.

Using Effective Transition Words

Transition words and phrases are key things that one should consider when writing an argumentative paper. They act as bridges and will connect your ideas and arguments. Transition words will help your reader identify the counter argument and rebuttal you are writing. It is an effective way of making the argument clearer. When you are creating a refutation essay, it is important you include these words. Some common transition phrases that can be used when writing include:

•       However
•       Instead of
•       On the other hand
•       In contrast
•       It can be argued that
•       The problem with that

As you write a rebuttal in a sentence, be sure you use words that will easily connect the two things being compared or contrasted. These words will show a relationship between arguments and will link one idea to the next being presented.

Rebuttal Examples In an Argumentative Essay

You will have to make your arguments in essays on various topics. It is important to know the proper argumentative essay structure before getting started. Once this has been addressed, you can start to work on the counter-argument. For example, let’s say that the essay focuses on the violence children learn from video games. The objection being made is that these games cause children to use guns and shoot people.

You would then assert that violence in media existed long before the creation of video games. You would then make a counterargument that may state:

“Some may argue that certain video games include violent scenes that cause children to use guns. Youth violence does appear to be on the rise. However, before video games, there were other courses of violence that children had been exposed to. To blame video games, one would have to ignore the effect of movies, books, music, and other forms of media.”

In this example, the counter-argument addresses the initial point and acknowledges validity. It then makes use of transition words to present a different view, backed by research stating that other types of media have also had an impact on the rise of violence.

Being able to make a concise counter-argument is not always easy. It should be short and to the point. With a custom argumentative essay writing service , you can get help from experienced writers who know how to generate an effective counter-argument.

Common Mistakes To Avoid While Writing Refutation Sentences

There are some common mistakes that are often made by students when writing essays. This is why using a custom essay writing service can be beneficial. The professionals with these services will know how to properly structure an essay and know how to do a rebuttal in an essay. Here, you can learn about the mistakes that should be avoided when writing sentences and paragraphs.

•       Irrelevant counter-argument
•       Single sentence refutations
•       Repeating points already made
•       Not using transition words
•       Lack of research
•       Not citing sources and references
•       Being emotional
•       Relying on fallacies
•       Failure to fact-check
•       Poor structure and grammar

Avoiding these will ensure that any arguments made against an oppositional point will be effective.

Know that you know how to refute the points of the opposition and have this be an effective piece of an essay, you can create a paper that presents your view and supporting facts. While these essays can be difficult to structure, there are many resources online and services that can be of use. With the help me do my assignment service, you can gain access to expert advice that can help you with your essay structure and make sure that you avoid any common mistakes. Additionally, experienced professionals can provide guidance on how to effectively use transition words and how to start your essay. Knowing that you have this kind of assistance can make the essay writing process much less daunting.

Do you need a rebuttal in a synthesis essay?

This is not needed in a synthesis essay. These essays have an intro that provides the topic, a body that offers an objective two-sided interpretation, info from multiple sources, as well as citations, and a conclusion.

Which rebuttal would be ineffective in an argumentative essay?

If it takes the opposition’s point, acknowledges it, and then uses words to insult that point, it would be considered to be ineffective when drafting an argumentative essay.

Does a persuasive essay have a refutation?

Refutations are not used in persuasive essays. They are found in argumentative essays, where the writer is arguing a point and proving it is false by providing their own ideas and facts.

Related posts:

• How To Write A Good Compare And Contrast Essay: Topics, Examples And Step-by-step Guide

How to Write a Scholarship Essay

• The Best Online AP Courses For High School Students [Full Guide]
• Explaining Appeal to Ignorance Fallacy with Demonstrative Examples

Improve your writing with our guides

Definition Essay: The Complete Guide with Essay Topics and Examples

Critical Essay: The Complete Guide. Essay Topics, Examples and Outlines

Get 15% off your first order with edusson.

Connect with a professional writer within minutes by placing your first order. No matter the subject, difficulty, academic level or document type, our writers have the skills to complete it.

100% privacy. No spam ever.

Rebuttal Generator – Free & Online Tool for Counterarguments

When writing an argumentative or persuasive essay, you must also be able to anticipate and address opposing viewpoints. It strengthens your position and demonstrates a thorough understanding of the topic.

• Preparing for a debate?
• Writing an essay?
• Engaging in discussions?

The AI rebuttal generator can make compelling counterarguments and refutations in seconds!

🥊 What Is a Rebuttal?

• 😎 Rebuttal Generator Benefits
• ⚙️ How Does the Tool Work

🎬 How to Start a Rebuttal Paragraph

📝 rebuttal paragraph example.

• 📎 References

A rebuttal in academic writing is a counterargument that challenges opposing viewpoints and strengthens your position. It acknowledges and refutes potential objections to your argument to demonstrate your understanding of the topic and ability to engage with differing perspectives.

Here is an example of what a rebuttal might look like in an argumentative essay about cell phone allowance in schools.

• Initial argument (claim): Cell phones should not be allowed at schools because they distract students from learning.
• Counterargument (opposing viewpoint): Cell phones are essential for communication and emergencies, and restricting them at schools causes safety concerns.
• Rebuttal (argument support, counterargument opposition): While it's true that cell phones provide a sense of security, there are alternative methods to address these concerns. For example, implementing designated areas or times for students to check their phones. Additionally, schools can provide emergency communication channels, such as landlines or apps installed on school-owned devices, to ensure that students have access to help when needed.

⚠️ To develop counterarguments and build an effective defense line , you need profound research, well-integrated examples, and a clear understanding of the opposing perspective.

😎 5 Rebuttal Generator Benefits

Explore the numerous benefits of our cutting-edge rebuttal generator, designed to enhance your persuasive abilities:

⚙️ How the Rebuttal Generator Works?

Our rebuttal paragraph generator is an advanced and user-friendly platform designed to make it easy for everyone to develop persuasive arguments and counterarguments . It offers several powerful features to help you fully cover the topic.

Here are the main capacities of the tool:

Generating arguments and counterarguments for a claim.

When you insert a specific claim into the tool, it automatically generates arguments supporting that claim and counterarguments against it.

Generating additional arguments and counterarguments.

If you input an argument into the tool, it generates additional arguments supporting this position and counterarguments against it.

Generating rebuttals.

For each mode, you can choose to generate rebuttals, so the tool will go a step further and provide rebuttals to the corresponding counterarguments. This feature enables you to explore multiple angles of a given position and develop a rebuttal effectively.

If you're wondering what is a good way to start a rebuttal paragraph , you're at the right place. This section will discuss how to make your counterclaim passage impressive from the first sentence.

• Acknowledge the opposing viewpoint. Ensure you understand their position and its reasons before crafting your response.
• Present the opposing argument. Start your rebuttal paragraph by summarizing the opposing argument fairly and accurately. This shows that you have engaged with the other side's perspective and helps set the stage for your response.
• Provide evidence and reasoning. After presenting the opposing argument, provide evidence, examples, and reasoning to support your rebuttal.
• Address potential weaknesses. Anticipate possible counterarguments that the opposing side may raise in response to your rebuttal.
• Conclude with a strong statement. Finish your rebuttal paragraph with a strong statement summarizing your key points and reinforcing your position. Leave the reader with a clear understanding of why your rebuttal is persuasive and why they should consider your viewpoint.

Rebuttal Sentence Starters

An effective rebuttal starter lets you capture the audience's attention while addressing the opposing argument. Make your rebuttal persuasive with the starters from below.

Good rebuttal phrases:

• "I understand the perspective that opposing viewpoint suggests, however..."
• "It's worth acknowledging that opposing viewpoint may seem valid, but a closer examination reveals..."
• "Although some may argue that..., the reality is..."
• "At first glance, the argument for... appears strong, yet upon further analysis..."
• "While there may be merit to the idea of the opposing viewpoint, it overlooks the crucial factor of..."

Imagine you're writing an essay on "Should students be allowed to use AI?" Let's come up with a rebuttal paragraph example together.

Students should be allowed to use AI because these technologies can assist them in research, data analysis, and problem-solving, improving their educational outcomes and preparing them for the future workforce.

On the other hand, it can be argued that students should not be allowed to use AI in their learning because it may encourage a passive learning approach and discourage critical thinking. Overreliance on AI could worsen problem-solving skills and creativity, as students may rely on technologies too heavily. While expressing concerns about overreliance on AI is valid, it's essential to recognize the potential opportunities artificial intelligence can offer. For example, it can provide feedback, guidance, and scaffolding to support learners in enhancing their reasoning, analysis, and evaluation skills. When properly utilized, AI can be a valuable tool for students to develop and refine their critical thinking abilities, providing them with personalized assistance and resources to strengthen their cognitive capabilities. This way, using AI in education can empower students to become more adept at thinking critically and creatively rather than diminishing these essential skills.

Updated: Apr 5th, 2024

🔗 References

• Rebuttal Sections - Purdue OWL® - Purdue University
• Four Step Refutation | Department of Communication | University of Pittsburgh
• Formula for Refutation and Rebuttal | Writing Skills Lab
• Counter-argument And Rebuttal
• Counterarguments | University Writing & Speaking Center | University of Nevada, Reno

For full functionality of this site it is necessary to enable JavaScript.

• International

Both sides rest cases without Trump testifying in hush money trial

By CNN's Kara Scannell, Lauren Del Valle and Jeremy Herb in the courthouse

The jury will return next Tuesday for closing arguments. Read up on the steps in the Trump trial

From CNN's Lauren del Valle, Jhasua Razo and Gillian Roberts

The court will be dark for a week, a scheduling decision Judge Juan Merchan chose so the final stages of the trial weren’t broken up by a four-day Memorial Day weekend.

Merchan told jurors they will return next Tuesday for closing arguments , which are expected to take the whole day. Once the jury gets its instructions, Trump’s fate will be in its hands.

Here's a look at  what happens next in the trial :

Closing arguments:  Attorneys for the prosecution and defense each give a closing argument appealing to the jury that will soon consider the case. Because they have the burden of proof, prosecutors address the jury first but they also get the last word, so the prosecution will give a rebuttal argument after the defense closing argument.

Jury instruction or jury charge:  The judge instructs the jury as to the charges they must consider against the defendant and the laws governing their deliberations.

Jury deliberation:  A  panel of 12 jurors  considers the evidence presented at trial and charges against the defendant. The jury must be unanimous in its decision. The jury can communicate with the court and ask questions about the case with the court through handwritten notes.

Verdict:  The jury will notify the court that they’ve reached a verdict. The verdict will then be read in court and jurors will be polled to confirm the verdict read in court reflects their own vote.

Sentencing:  If the jury reaches a guilty verdict, the judge sentences the defendant, typically after a sentencing hearing at a later date.

CNN's Jeremy Herb and Kara Scannell contributed reporting to this post.

"Could Trump actually go to jail" and answers to more of your frequently asked questions

Analysis from CNN's Zachary B. Wolf

When CNN  asked for your questions  about former President Donald Trump’s first criminal trial for his role in hush money payments made before the 2016 election to women who said they had affairs with him, we got a flood of input.

Here are the answers to some of the questions:

Could Trump actually go to jail? I went to CNN’s chief legal analyst Laura Coates for the single, most-asked question.

Coates:  If Trump were to be found guilty of all of the counts, he could theoretically be facing more than a decade in prison. The 34 felony counts are classified as Class E felonies in New York, the lowest level felony in the state. The maximum penalty for each of those counts is four years. However, New York caps sentencing for this type of felony at 20 years. It is within the judge’s discretion to decide whether those sentences would run concurrently or consecutively. Because the crimes involve nonviolent offenses and Trump does not have a criminal record, the judge could also consider jailing him for a period that is but a fraction of the maximum penalty. Another possibility is that the judge could forego prison entirely and place him on probation.

If Trump were sent to prison, would he still have his presidential Secret Service protecting him in jail?

I reached out to the Secret Service to ask if they had planned for the potential that Trump could be imprisoned. Not surprisingly, I was told by a spokesman that this is “something we can not comment on at this time.” But note that as a matter of US law, former presidents and their spouses are afforded lifetime Secret Service protection unless they decline it.

Is a unanimous guilty verdict required for Trump to be convicted in this case, or could he be convicted by a majority of seven jurors voting "guilty"?

A unanimous vote is required for either conviction or acquittal. Anything short of a unanimous verdict would be a hung jury. The judge will try very hard to get the jury to reach a unanimous verdict. A hung jury might be perceived as a net win for Trump since prosecutors would have to ponder whether to try him again on the same charges and there’s little chance it would happen before Election Day.

Get answers to other frequently asked questions as the trial nears a close.

The jury is expected to get the hush money case as early as next week. Here's what happened today

From CNN's Elise Hammond

Robert Costello, an attorney connected with Michael Cohen, finished his testimony on Tuesday before the defense rested its case, teeing up the jury to start deliberations soon in the criminal hush money trial of Donald Trump.

Costello was called to the stand by the defense on Monday where he got into a contentious exchange  with the judge.

Trump is charged  with 34 counts of falsifying business records  to cover up a payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election. Closing arguments are expected next Tuesday, the day after Memorial Day weekend.

In the morning:

• Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger resumed her cross-examination of Costello. He testified that he did not discuss with Cohen how he was connected to Rudy Giuliani at their first meeting at the Regency Hotel. 
• The jury saw a later email in which Costello told Cohen that Giuliani joined Trump’s team at the White House and that it could be “very very useful” to Cohen. Hoffinger pressed Costello if he was pushing Cohen to retain him because he could provide a backchannel to Trump. Costello denied that.
• On redirect , Costello told Trump attorney Emil Bove that Giuliani first brought up the word “backchannel” in response to Costello telling him they "couldn’t make this public.” He denied that he pressured Cohen to do anything.
• Costello said he didn’t have “any control” when Cohen pled guilty in federal court in 2018. Prosecutors showed an email suggesting that Costello was complaining that Cohen was not working with him. Hoffinger also pressed Costello on whether he was encouraging Cohen not to cooperate .
• Costello denied that he was trying to intimidate Cohen when he was asked about his testimony before a House committee last week where he said Cohen was lying about things he said on the stand earlier in the trial

In the afternoon:

• The defense and prosecution worked out jury instructions , discussing the language around intent, an alleged conspiracy and more with the judge.
• Election law: The judge reserved his decision on whether or not to include the word "willful" while discussing federal election law. The defense wants it included while the prosecution argues it is not necessary. Prosecutors allege that Trump falsified business records with the intent to commit an election law violation .
• More on intent: Merchan ruled to keep the standard, criminal jury instructions around the issue of intent. The defense proposed a second line , which would have meant the jury would have had to determine intent in two separate incidents — intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime.
• Legitimate press function: Merchan elected to include a line that says the National Enquirer did publish articles and do things for Karen McDougal, pursuant to the agreement within normal legitimate press function.

Closing arguments next:  Attorneys for the prosecution and defense will each give a closing argument on Tuesday . Because they have the burden of proof, prosecutors address the jury first but they also get to give a rebuttal argument after the defense. The judge will then instruct the jury on the charges and the laws governing their deliberations. The jury is expected to start deliberating on Wednesday next week, according to the judge.

Trump accuses judge of being "corrupt" and "conflicted"

From CNN's Aditi Sangal

Former President Donald Trump accused Judge Juan Merchan, who is overseeing the hush money trial, of being "corrupt" and "conflicted."

"The judge is so biased, so corrupt," Trump said outside the courtroom after today's proceedings. "And he is so conflicted."

"When you have a corrupt judge, lots of bad things happen," he added.

Merchan's  gag order  does not prohibit Trump from talking about the judge.

Trump also repeated his false claim that President Joe Biden's administration has played a role in this trial. There is no basis for this claim . There is no evidence that Biden has had any role in launching or running Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecution — and Bragg is a locally elected official who does not report to the federal government. The  indictment  in the case was approved by a grand jury of ordinary citizens.

The charge conference has ended. Here are the key points from the jury instruction debate

From CNN's Christina Zdanowicz

The defense and prosecution finished debating jury instructions during the charge conference on Tuesday, discussing the language around intent, an alleged conspiracy and more.

Here are the key points:

Alleged conspiracy: The parties debated language about the jury's requirement to find the prosecutors proved that Donald Trump participated in an alleged conspiracy to undermine the 2016 election. The prosecution argued that Trump’s meeting with former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker at Trump Tower in 2015 went toward Trump’s participation in the conspiracy, while the defense called the meeting a “series of pretty standard campaign activities that were not criminal.”   

Remember:  Trump was  first indicted in March 2023  by the Manhattan district attorney on state charges related to a hush-money payment to an adult film star in 2016. Prosecutors allege Trump was a part of an illegal conspiracy to  undermine  the integrity of the 2016 election. Further, they allege he was part of an unlawful plan to suppress negative information, including the $130,000 payment.  Trump has pleaded not guilty .

Intent: Originally, the defense proposed a second line about intent, which meant people must establish beyond a reasonable doubt two separate intents, the intent to defraud and the intent to commit or conceal the aid of another crime. Due to concerns with this section, Judge Juan Merchan opted to keep the standard, criminal jury instructions language around the issue of intent.

Here are some other topics discussed around jury instructions:

• Both sides debated instructions around tax crimes relating to Cohen testifying that former Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer  Allen Weisselberg  was “grossing up” the money Cohen was paid.
• The defense asked the judge to instruct the jury that hush money is not illegal. Merchan said he doesn't think it's necessary, as that came out in testimony.
• Merchan said he thought his limiting instructions on Cohen’s guilty plea, American Media Inc.'s non-prosecution agreement and others “were appropriate” and that he would give the same instruction he did during the trial.
• There was a debate around New York legal precedent on if retainer agreements are required between an attorney and a client. The judge said he would look into this and get back to them.

Asking for another deviation: Defense attorney Emil Bove requested another deviation from the standard criminal jury instructions language when he asked the judge to be as specific as possible when describing the statutes as they are applied in this case, noting there wasn’t much of a precedent.

Why prosecutors want broader jury instructions, according to lawyers

How the jury will hear its instructions before going to deliberate is very important in this case, CNN commentators and former prosecutors say.

Donald Trump is facing 34 counts of falsifying business records related to the payment to Stormy Daniels. Prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that  Trump falsified business records with the intent to commit or conceal another crime — but they don’t have to prove that Trump committed that crime.

“I’ve always thought the most difficult part of this case for the prosecution to prove is that connection to any underlying crime that they have to show that Donald Trump was intending to violate by falsifying records,” said Carrie Cordero, the former counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security.

The presence of an underlying crime is what makes these charges felonies, instead of misdemeanors, she said. 

Shan Wu, a former federal prosecutor, also emphasized the importance of jury instruction in this trial.

“The more broad that jury instruction is, which is the way that the judge is going, the easier it is for them to make that connection evidentiary,” Wu told CNN, referring to the connection between falsifying the business records and a second underlying crime.

Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett attends Trump trial in New York 

From CNN's Annie Grayer

Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas attended the criminal trial of former President Donald Trump in New York on Tuesday on the heels of her  viral  rebuke of   GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene last week.

Crockett’s decision to attend the trial marks a rare appearance by a Democratic lawmaker at the proceedings — and comes as a multitude of GOP lawmakers have made the trek to the courtroom in an effort to defend the former president. 

"I was in New York to raise some money and I decided I must see what’s going on," Crockett, a former criminal defense attorney and public defender, told CNN.

"I was curious as a lawyer and just wanted to get my own firsthand take on what was going on" Crockett said, adding she wanted to have information to push back against her Republican colleagues who have tirelessly defended the former president and have even  delayed  doing their jobs in order to appear at Trump’s side throughout the trial. 

Court adjourns for the day

Court is adjourned for the day, but first Judge Juan Merchan said he'll try to get the final instructions to the attorneys by the end of the day Thursday so they have the long weekend to prepare for summations.

Lawyers dispute what New York law says about retainer agreements

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass citing New York legal precedent asks that Judge Juan Merchan clarify for the jury in a curative instruction to combat the defense's notion that there's "nothing improper about not having a retainer agreement."

Steinglass said, "It is in fact the law."

"We don’t think that’s right, judge," Bove says in response, pointing to different New York case law.

Bove says he appreciates that Steinglass didn't suggest there was bad intention on the defense's part, but said the prosecutors are trying to place weight on their argument that a written retainer agreement is required between an attorney and a client.

Bove cited law, saying that a retainer might be required to collect fees from a client when there's a dispute over the fees but a retainer is not ethically required to provide services.

"I’ll read the rules, I’ll read the decisions and I’ll get back to you on that," Merchan says.

If he determines there is a requirement for a curative instruction, he adds there will have to be a follow-up.

"This is the government seeking to put weight on their argument," Bove argues with regards to the proposed curative instruction.

Please enable JavaScript for a better experience.

• Share full article

When Prison and Mental Illness Amount to a Death Sentence

The downward spiral of one inmate, Markus Johnson, shows the larger failures of the nation’s prisons to care for the mentally ill.

Supported by

By Glenn Thrush

Photographs by Carlos Javier Ortiz

Glenn Thrush spent more than a year reporting this article, interviewing close to 50 people and reviewing court-obtained body-camera footage and more than 1,500 pages of documents.

• Published May 5, 2024 Updated May 7, 2024

Markus Johnson slumped naked against the wall of his cell, skin flecked with pepper spray, his face a mask of puzzlement, exhaustion and resignation. Four men in black tactical gear pinned him, his face to the concrete, to cuff his hands behind his back.

He did not resist. He couldn’t. He was so gravely dehydrated he would be dead by their next shift change.

Listen to this article with reporter commentary

“I didn’t do anything,” Mr. Johnson moaned as they pressed a shield between his shoulders.

It was 1:19 p.m. on Sept. 6, 2019, in the Danville Correctional Center, a medium-security prison a few hours south of Chicago. Mr. Johnson, 21 and serving a short sentence for gun possession, was in the throes of a mental collapse that had gone largely untreated, but hardly unwatched.

He had entered in good health, with hopes of using the time to gain work skills. But for the previous three weeks, Mr. Johnson, who suffered from bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, had refused to eat or take his medication. Most dangerous of all, he had stealthily stopped drinking water, hastening the physical collapse that often accompanies full-scale mental crises.

Mr. Johnson’s horrific downward spiral, which has not been previously reported, represents the larger failures of the nation’s prisons to care for the mentally ill. Many seriously ill people receive no treatment . For those who do, the outcome is often determined by the vigilance and commitment of individual supervisors and frontline staff, which vary greatly from system to system, prison to prison, and even shift to shift.

The country’s jails and prisons have become its largest provider of inpatient mental health treatment, with 10 times as many seriously mentally ill people now held behind bars as in hospitals. Estimating the population of incarcerated people with major psychological problems is difficult, but the number is likely 200,000 to 300,000, experts say.

Many of these institutions remain ill-equipped to handle such a task, and the burden often falls on prison staff and health care personnel who struggle with the dual roles of jailer and caregiver in a high-stress, dangerous, often dehumanizing environment.

In 2021, Joshua McLemore , a 29-year-old with schizophrenia held for weeks in an isolation cell in Jackson County, Ind., died of organ failure resulting from a “refusal to eat or drink,” according to an autopsy. In April, New York City agreed to pay $28 million to settle a lawsuit filed by the family of Nicholas Feliciano, a young man with a history of mental illness who suffered severe brain damage after attempting to hang himself on Rikers Island — as correctional officers stood by.

Mr. Johnson’s mother has filed a wrongful-death suit against the state and Wexford Health Sources, a for-profit health care contractor in Illinois prisons. The New York Times reviewed more than 1,500 pages of reports, along with depositions taken from those involved. Together, they reveal a cascade of missteps, missed opportunities, potential breaches of protocol and, at times, lapses in common sense.

Prison officials and Wexford staff took few steps to intervene even after it became clear that Mr. Johnson, who had been hospitalized repeatedly for similar episodes and recovered, had refused to take medication. Most notably, they did not transfer him to a state prison facility that provides more intensive mental health treatment than is available at regular prisons, records show.

The quality of medical care was also questionable, said Mr. Johnson’s lawyers, Sarah Grady and Howard Kaplan, a married legal team in Chicago. Mr. Johnson lost 50 to 60 pounds during three weeks in solitary confinement, but officials did not initiate interventions like intravenous feedings or transfer him to a non-prison hospital.

And they did not take the most basic step — dialing 911 — until it was too late.

There have been many attempts to improve the quality of mental health treatment in jails and prisons by putting care on par with punishment — including a major effort in Chicago . But improvements have proved difficult to enact and harder to sustain, hampered by funding and staffing shortages.

Lawyers representing the state corrections department, Wexford and staff members who worked at Danville declined to comment on Mr. Johnson’s death, citing the unresolved litigation. In their interviews with state police investigators, and in depositions, employees defended their professionalism and adherence to procedure, while citing problems with high staff turnover, difficult work conditions, limited resources and shortcomings of co-workers.

But some expressed a sense of resignation about the fate of Mr. Johnson and others like him.

Prisoners have “much better chances in a hospital, but that’s not their situation,” said a senior member of Wexford’s health care team in a deposition.

“I didn’t put them in prison,” he added. “They are in there for a reason.”

Markus Mison Johnson was born on March 1, 1998, to a mother who believed she was not capable of caring for him.

Days after his birth, he was taken in by Lisa Barker Johnson, a foster mother in her 30s who lived in Zion, Ill., a working-class city halfway between Chicago and Milwaukee. Markus eventually became one of four children she adopted from different families.

The Johnson house is a lively split level, with nieces, nephews, grandchildren and neighbors’ children, family keepsakes, video screens and juice boxes. Ms. Johnson sits at its center on a kitchen chair, chin resting on her hand as children wander over to share their thoughts, or to tug on her T-shirt to ask her to be their bathroom buddy.

From the start, her bond with Markus was particularly powerful, in part because the two looked so much alike, with distinctive dimpled smiles. Many neighbors assumed he was her biological son. The middle name she chose for him was intended to convey that message.

“Mison is short for ‘my son,’” she said standing over his modest footstone grave last summer.

He was happy at home. School was different. His grades were good, but he was intensely shy and was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in elementary school.

That was around the time the bullying began. His sisters were fierce defenders, but they could only do so much. He did the best he could, developing a quick, taunting tongue.

These experiences filled him with a powerful yearning to fit in.

It was not to be.

When he was around 15, he called 911 in a panic, telling the dispatcher he saw two men standing near the small park next to his house threatening to abduct children playing there. The officers who responded found nothing out of the ordinary, and rang the Johnsons’ doorbell.

He later told his mother he had heard a voice telling him to “protect the kids.”

He was hospitalized for the first time at 16, and given medications that stabilized him for stretches of time. But the crises would strike every six months or so, often triggered by his decision to stop taking his medication.

His family became adept at reading signs he was “getting sick.” He would put on his tan Timberlands and a heavy winter coat, no matter the season, and perch on the edge of his bed as if bracing for battle. Sometimes, he would cook his own food, paranoid that someone might poison him.

He graduated six months early, on the dean’s list, but was rudderless, and hanging out with younger boys, often paying their way.

His mother pointed out the perils of buying friendship.

“I don’t care,” he said. “At least I’ll be popular for a minute.”

Zion’s inviting green grid of Bible-named streets belies the reality that it is a rough, unforgiving place to grow up. Family members say Markus wanted desperately to prove he was tough, and emulated his younger, reckless group of friends.

Like many of them, he obtained a pistol. He used it to hold up a convenience store clerk for $425 in January 2017, according to police records. He cut a plea deal for two years of probation, and never explained to his family what had made him do it.

But he kept getting into violent confrontations. In late July 2018, he was arrested in a neighbor’s garage with a handgun he later admitted was his. He was still on probation for the robbery, and his public defender negotiated a plea deal that would send him to state prison until January 2020.

An inpatient mental health system

Around 40 percent of the about 1.8 million people in local, state and federal jails and prison suffer from at least one mental illness, and many of these people have concurrent issues with substance abuse, according to recent Justice Department estimates.

Psychological problems, often exacerbated by drug use, often lead to significant medical problems resulting from a lack of hygiene or access to good health care.

“When you suffer depression in the outside world, it’s hard to concentrate, you have reduced energy, your sleep is disrupted, you have a very gloomy outlook, so you stop taking care of yourself,” said Robert L. Trestman , a Virginia Tech medical school professor who has worked on state prison mental health reforms.

The paradox is that prison is often the only place where sick people have access to even minimal care.

But the harsh work environment, remote location of many prisons, and low pay have led to severe shortages of corrections staff and the unwillingness of doctors, nurses and counselors to work with the incarcerated mentally ill.

In the early 2000s, prisoners’ rights lawyers filed a class-action lawsuit against Illinois claiming “deliberate indifference” to the plight of about 5,000 mentally ill prisoners locked in segregated units and denied treatment and medication.

In 2014, the parties reached a settlement that included minimum staffing mandates, revamped screening protocols, restrictions on the use of solitary confinement and the allocation of about $100 million to double capacity in the system’s specialized mental health units.

Yet within six months of the deal, Pablo Stewart, an independent monitor chosen to oversee its enforcement, declared the system to be in a state of emergency.

Over the years, some significant improvements have been made. But Dr. Stewart’s final report , drafted in 2022, gave the system failing marks for its medication and staffing policies and reliance on solitary confinement “crisis watch” cells.

Ms. Grady, one of Mr. Johnson’s lawyers, cited an additional problem: a lack of coordination between corrections staff and Wexford’s professionals, beyond dutifully filling out dozens of mandated status reports.

“Markus Johnson was basically documented to death,” she said.

‘I’m just trying to keep my head up’

Mr. Johnson was not exactly looking forward to prison. But he saw it as an opportunity to learn a trade so he could start a family when he got out.

On Dec. 18, 2018, he arrived at a processing center in Joliet, where he sat for an intake interview. He was coherent and cooperative, well-groomed and maintained eye contact. He was taking his medication, not suicidal and had a hearty appetite. He was listed as 5 feet 6 inches tall and 256 pounds.

Mr. Johnson described his mood as “go with the flow.”

A few days later, after arriving in Danville, he offered a less settled assessment during a telehealth visit with a Wexford psychiatrist, Dr. Nitin Thapar. Mr. Johnson admitted to being plagued by feelings of worthlessness, hopelessness and “constant uncontrollable worrying” that affected his sleep.

He told Dr. Thapar he had heard voices in the past — but not now — telling him he was a failure, and warning that people were out to get him.

At the time he was incarcerated, the basic options for mentally ill people in Illinois prisons included placement in the general population or transfer to a special residential treatment program at the Dixon Correctional Center, west of Chicago. Mr. Johnson seemed out of immediate danger, so he was assigned to a standard two-man cell in the prison’s general population, with regular mental health counseling and medication.

Things started off well enough. “I’m just trying to keep my head up,” he wrote to his mother. “Every day I learn to be stronger & stronger.”

But his daily phone calls back home hinted at friction with other inmates. And there was not much for him to do after being turned down for a janitorial training program.

Then, in the spring of 2019, his grandmother died, sending him into a deep hole.

Dr. Thapar prescribed a new drug used to treat major depressive disorders. Its most common side effect is weight gain. Mr. Johnson stopped taking it.

On July 4, he told Dr. Thapar matter-of-factly during a telehealth check-in that he was no longer taking any of his medications. “I’ve been feeling normal, I guess,” he said. “I feel like I don’t need the medication anymore.”

Dr. Thapar said he thought that was a mistake, but accepted the decision and removed Mr. Johnson from his regular mental health caseload — instructing him to “reach out” if he needed help, records show.

The pace of calls back home slackened. Mr. Johnson spent more time in bed, and became more surly. At a group-therapy session, he sat stone silent, after showing up late.

By early August, he was telling guards he had stopped eating.

At some point, no one knows when, he had intermittently stopped drinking fluids.

‘I’m having a breakdown’

Then came the crash.

On Aug. 12, Mr. Johnson got into a fight with his older cellmate.

He was taken to a one-man disciplinary cell. A few hours later, Wexford’s on-site mental health counselor, Melanie Easton, was shocked by his disoriented condition. Mr. Johnson stared blankly, then burst into tears when asked if he had “suffered a loss in the previous six months.”

He was so unresponsive to her questions she could not finish the evaluation.

Ms. Easton ordered that he be moved to a 9-foot by 8-foot crisis cell — solitary confinement with enhanced monitoring. At this moment, a supervisor could have ticked the box for “residential treatment” on a form to transfer him to Dixon. That did not happen, according to records and depositions.

Around this time, he asked to be placed back on his medication but nothing seems to have come of it, records show.

By mid-August, he said he was visualizing “people that were not there,” according to case notes. At first, he was acting more aggressively, once flicking water at a guard through a hole in his cell door. But his energy ebbed, and he gradually migrated downward — from standing to bunk to floor.

“I’m having a breakdown,” he confided to a Wexford employee.

At the time, inmates in Illinois were required to declare an official hunger strike before prison officials would initiate protocols, including blood testing or forced feedings. But when a guard asked Mr. Johnson why he would not eat, he said he was “fasting,” as opposed to starving himself, and no action seems to have been taken.

‘Tell me this is OK!’

Lt. Matthew Morrison, one of the few people at Danville to take a personal interest in Mr. Johnson, reported seeing a white rind around his mouth in early September. He told other staff members the cell gave off “a death smell,” according to a deposition.

On Sept. 5, they moved Mr. Johnson to one of six cells adjacent to the prison’s small, bare-bones infirmary. Prison officials finally placed him on the official hunger strike protocol without his consent.

Mr. Morrison, in his deposition, said he was troubled by the inaction of the Wexford staff, and the lack of urgency exhibited by the medical director, Dr. Justin Young.

On Sept. 5, Mr. Morrison approached Dr. Young to express his concerns, and the doctor agreed to order blood and urine tests. But Dr. Young lived in Chicago, and was on site at the prison about four times a week, according to Mr. Kaplan. Friday, Sept. 6, 2019, was not one of those days.

Mr. Morrison arrived at work that morning, expecting to find Mr. Johnson’s testing underway. A Wexford nurse told him Dr. Young believed the tests could wait.

Mr. Morrison, stunned, asked her to call Dr. Young.

“He’s good till Monday,” Dr. Young responded, according to Mr. Morrison.

“Come on, come on, look at this guy! You tell me this is OK!” the officer responded.

Eventually, Justin Duprey, a licensed nurse practitioner and the most senior Wexford employee on duty that day, authorized the test himself.

Mr. Morrison, thinking he had averted a disaster, entered the cell and implored Mr. Johnson into taking the tests. He refused.

So prison officials obtained approval to remove him forcibly from his cell.

‘Oh, my God’

What happened next is documented in video taken from cameras held by officers on the extraction team and obtained by The Times through a court order.

Mr. Johnson is scarcely recognizable as the neatly groomed 21-year-old captured in a cellphone picture a few months earlier. His skin is ashen, eyes fixed on the middle distance. He might be 40. Or 60.

At first, he places his hands forward through the hole in his cell door to be cuffed. This is against procedure, the officers shout. His hands must be in back.

He will not, or cannot, comply. He wanders to the rear of his cell and falls hard. Two blasts of pepper spray barely elicit a reaction. The leader of the tactical team later said he found it unusual and unnerving.

The next video is in the medical unit. A shield is pressed to his chest. He is in agony, begging for them to stop, as two nurses attempt to insert a catheter.

Then they move him, half-conscious and limp, onto a wheelchair for the blood draw.

For the next 20 minutes, the Wexford nurse performing the procedure, Angelica Wachtor, jabs hands and arms to find a vessel that will hold shape. She winces with each puncture, tries to comfort him, and grows increasingly rattled.

“Oh, my God,” she mutters, and asks why help is not on the way.

She did not request assistance or discuss calling 911, records indicate.

“Can you please stop — it’s burning real bad,” Mr. Johnson said.

Soon after, a member of the tactical team reminds Ms. Wachtor to take Mr. Johnson’s vitals before taking him back to his cell. She would later tell Dr. Young she had been unable to able to obtain his blood pressure.

“You good?” one of the team members asks as they are preparing to leave.

“Yeah, I’ll have to be,” she replies in the recording.

Officers lifted him back onto his bunk, leaving him unconscious and naked except for a covering draped over his groin. His expressionless face is visible through the window on the cell door as it closes.

‘Cardiac arrest.’

Mr. Duprey, the nurse practitioner, had been sitting inside his office after corrections staff ordered him to shelter for his own protection, he said. When he emerged, he found Ms. Wachtor sobbing, and after a delay, he was let into the cell. Finding no pulse, Mr. Duprey asked a prison employee to call 911 so Mr. Johnson could be taken to a local emergency room.

The Wexford staff initiated CPR. It did not work.

At 3:38 p.m., the paramedics declared Markus Mison Johnson dead.

Afterward, a senior official at Danville called the Johnson family to say he had died of “cardiac arrest.”

Lisa Johnson pressed for more information, but none was initially forthcoming. She would soon receive a box hastily crammed with his possessions: uneaten snacks, notebooks, an inspirational memoir by a man who had served 20 years at Leavenworth.

Later, Shiping Bao, the coroner who examined his body, determined Mr. Johnson had died of severe dehydration. He told the state police it “was one of the driest bodies he had ever seen.”

For a long time, Ms. Johnson blamed herself. She says that her biggest mistake was assuming that the state, with all its resources, would provide a level of care comparable to what she had been able to provide her son.

She had stopped accepting foster care children while she was raising Markus and his siblings. But as the months dragged on, she decided her once-boisterous house had become oppressively still, and let local agencies know she was available again.

“It is good to have children around,” she said. “It was too quiet around here.”

Read by Glenn Thrush

Audio produced by Jack D’Isidoro .

Glenn Thrush covers the Department of Justice. He joined The Times in 2017 after working for Politico, Newsday, Bloomberg News, The New York Daily News, The Birmingham Post-Herald and City Limits. More about Glenn Thrush

Advertisement