Counterargument

1
Counterargument

• In persuasive-argumentative writing, used to show
  your readers that you are knowledgeable about a
  full range of positions other than your own.
• As a rhetorical strategy, it demonstrates that
  you are interested in finding common ground and
  consensus with your opponents.
• As a statement of your character, it shows that
  you are honest and forthcoming about other
  viewpoints that might jeopardize your position.

2
3 parts

• Acknowledgement
• Accommodation
• Refutation

3
3 Stages of CounterargumentSTAGE 1 ACKNOWLEGMENT

• ACKNOWLEDGMENT
• a paraphrase, with useful examples, of an
  argument posed by your potential opponents

• proof to your readers that you can, not only
  understand the complex ideas of your opponents,
  but digest them clearly for the edification of
  your readers.
• remains neutral in tone.

4
Acknowledgement Example
Science writer Scott LaFee, senior public
information officer for health sciences research
at the University of California San Diego, argues
that government should change American
consumption patterns through taxation because it
is not in the interest of food manufacturers to
do so. That leaves government policymakers and
regulators to act as mom. Everyone knows thats
a hard and thankless job, says LaFee. LaFee
believes taking the criticism for taxation of
sugary drinks is just one of those consequences
of taking responsibility for the health of your
nation.
5
STAGE 2 ACCOMMODATION

• ACCOMMODATION
• a statement conceding to the merit of some part
  of the opposing argument--either in the argument,
  itself, or in the character and values of the
  arguer

• establishes common ground.
• shows you are representing the opposition as
  fairly as possible.
• points out logic, values, interpretations,
  motivations that you respect in the opposing
  argument
• shows you are capable of empathy and
  understanding.
• be careful to agree ONLY IN PART with the
  opponent.

6
Example of Accommodation
. . . Arguments like LaFees, about our
governments responsibility to protect people
against their own bad habits, like
overconsumption of sugary drinks, are easy to
sympathize with, especially in light of the
self-interested way in which soda manufacturers
promote a view of popular culture in which soda
pop is often the centerpiece for every youth
ritual and important social event. Surveys
demonstrate that male teens consume an average of
868 cans of soda per year, while more than fifty
percent of all eight-year-olds consume a minimum
of one can of soda per day. Statistics like these
demonstrate the extent to which consumers can be
innocent and unwitting victims of bad habits
encouraged by the beverage manufacturers. . . .
7
STAGE 3 REFUTATION

• REFUTATION
• 1) Argue against the opponent on the terms
  introduced by you in acknowledgment, OR
• 2) Introduce what you believe to be a more valid
  set of criteria to discuss the argument.

• remains even-tempered and uses a rational tone
• responds by addressing those parts of the
  opposing argument with which you CANNOT agree
  interpretations of the facts inappropriate
  examples
• subverts logic or questions the values in the
  opposing argument, in defense of your own
  position.
• does not veer off topic stays focused on the
  criteria introduced in acknowledgment

8
Example of Refutation
. . . However, no amount of government
intervention, least of all the negative
reinforcement of taxation, will modify the
behaviors of young people whose cultural identity
is connected to the consumption of sugary drinks
and sodas. Every young adult generation, in
practically every culture, comes of age through
the rebellious behavior of consuming what their
society does not want them to consume. Bans and
prohibitions on alcohol and cigarettes, for
example, have proved time and again that a
government will always fail to dissuade young
people from becoming adult consumers of unhealthy
products. In fact, the negative reinforcement in
their youth only makes them more willing to
accommodate these unhealthy behaviors and
products into their daily adult lives, leading to
a cultural dependency on them, if not a
psychological one. Government intervention such
as taxation inures people to the health risks and
indirectly persuades them to look at sugary
drinks and similar products in the same way that
cable television and internet service are
regarded as modern utilities. Needs and wants
eventually become blurred by these methods.
9
The End Result
Science writer Scott LaFee, senior public
information officer for health sciences research
at the University of California San Diego, argues
that it behooves government to change American
consumption patterns through taxation because it
is not in the interest of food manufacturers to
do so. That leaves government policymakers and
regulators to act as mom. Everyone knows thats
a hard and thankless job, says La Fee. LaFee
other advocates of government health intervention
would argue, taking the criticism for taxation of
sugary drinks is just one of those consequences
of taking responsibility for the health of your
nation. Arguments like LaFees, about our
governments responsibility to protect people
against their own bad habits, like
overconsumption of sugary drinks, are easy to
sympathize with, especially in light of the
self-interested way in which soda manufacturers
promote a view of popular culture in which soda
pop is often the centerpiece for every youth
ritual and important social event. Surveys
demonstrate that male teens consume an average of
868 cans of soda per year, while more than fifty
percent of all eight-year-olds consume a minimum
of one can of soda per day. Statistics like these
demonstrate the extent to which consumers can be
innocent and unwitting victims of bad habits
encouraged by the beverage manufacturers. . . .
However, no amount of government intervention,
least of all the negative reinforcement of
taxation, will modify the behaviors of young
people whose cultural identity is connected to
the consumption of sugary drinks and sodas.
Every young adult generation, in practically
every culture, comes of age through the
rebellious behavior of consuming what their
society does not want them to consume. Bans and
prohibitions on alcohol and cigarettes, for
example, have proved time and again that a
government will always fail to dissuade young
people from becoming adult consumers of unhealthy
products. In fact, the negative reinforcement in
their youth only makes them more willing to
accommodate these unhealthy behaviors and
products into their daily adult lives, leading to
a cultural dependency on them, if not a
psychological one. Government intervention such
as taxation inures people to the health risks and
indirectly persuades them to look at sugary
drinks and similar products in the same way that
cable television and internet service are
regarded as modern utilities. Needs and wants
eventually become blurred by these methods.
10
Night

• Acknowledgement
• Accommodation
• Refutation

How will you use these concepts in your paragraph?