Counterarguments and concessions

Writing 20 Cary Moskovitz Duke University

Counterarguments & Concessions In most direct forms of argument, authors make claims and offer support for their claims. Because readers of scholarly work know that important questions rarely have simple answers, they expect authors to also consider seriously both contrary points of view (counterarguments) and evidence that runs counter to an author’s claims (I’ll call this counterevidence). When the author admits some legitimacy to counterarguments or counterevidence, we call them concessions.

Novices often mistakenly believe that including counterarguments or concessions weakens their arguments, thinking that readers will be more inclined to agree with them if they don’t reveal these “weaknesses.” But in scholarly writing, these elements generally make your argument more compelling.

Why? First, they enhance your ethos—how your readers feel about you as an author; when you seriously address a counterargument, when you discuss a study or other evidence that runs counter to your claim, when you explain how your claim doesn’t hold for certain situations, and so on, your readers get the sense that you’re knowledgeable about your subject and that you’re being straightforward. Second, scholarly audiences often know something (maybe a good deal) about the subject; as they read, they think of objections — reasons why your claim might not hold. Since you won’t be there to answer their objections, the best you can do is try to anticipate objections and respond to them in your paper.

When novices first try their hands at making these moves in their papers, however, they often miss the mark: they confuse serious discussion of these elements with perfunctory or disingenuous discussion.

This might show up as straw man counterarguments—the rebuttal of counterarguments that no one would seriously make, or as ad homonym attacks—responses that try to discredit the person rather than refute the argument. While these irresponsible “tricks” might work for unsophisticated readers, they’re likely to backfire for more sophisticated audiences.

TEMPLATES FOR COUNTERARGUMENT, CONCESSION AND RESPONSE Here are some common phrases used to introduce these moves. Use them freely in your own work, and add to the list as you find others.

Counterarguments

Responses

[some person or group] claims/argues/suggests that…

However, …

________’s argument implies that…

Yet…

________ interprets these results to mean that…

But this interpretation is flawed/questionable…

According to [someone], …[claim about science]

Yet the bulk of studies on the subject suggest…

Critics/supporters of ________ argue that…

But what they fail to acknowledge is…

Concession

Response

Of course, …

But this does not mean…

I concede that…

Nevertheless, …

It is true that…

However, it is also true that…

It may well be that…

In spite of this …

Have there been contrary findings? Yes,…

But…

While we acknowledge that …

we should not overlook the fact that…

Critics of ____ are right that…

but what they fail to recognize is…

There are in fact published studies that suggest…

Yet these results are contradicted by…

It is possible that…

But it is more likely that…

The results could be interpreted to mean…

But a more compelling interpretation is…

ELEMENTS OF ACADEMIC ARGUMENT

Writing 20 Cary Moskovitz

Exercise 1: Identifying the moves

In the passage below, try to identify the following with notes in the margin: claims, support for claims counterarguments (or counterevidence) concessions responses to counterarguments or concessions

Underline the words that signal the move to the reader.

In 1998, John Colquhoun published an argument against water fluoridation. Newborn and Horowitz wrote a response to Colquhoun arguing for fluoridation.1 The following passage comes from that response.

Opponents of water fluoridation often argue that [cavities are] caused simply by poor nutrition and that a good diet alone can impede dental decay. Of course, diets that severely restrict sugar intake can limit decay.

The relationship between sugar intake and caries in humans has not been ignored by supporters of water fluoridation [36]. However, dietary control, particularly the restriction of sugary foods, is not a practical public health method for caries prevention, because it can only work on populations that are institutionalized…

Colquhoun's statement that fluoridation is practiced only in America and in countries under strong American influence is patently false.

Singapore (100 percent fluoridated), Hong Kong (100 percent fluoridated), Malaysia (44 percent fluoridated)… are hardly all under the hegemony of the United States.

Newbrun, E. and Horowitz, H. “Why we have not changed our minds about water fluoridation.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 42:526-30 , 1999.

1

2

ELEMENTS OF ACADEMIC ARGUMENT

Writing 20 Cary Moskovitz

Exercise 2: Employing Counterargument, Concession and Response This exercise is intended to help you learn to employ concessions, counter-arguments and responses in constructing an argument. I will expect to see you incorporate similar rhetorical elements in your commentary.

Part A: Draft the elements

I will assign groups to argue for one of the claims listed at the bottom of this page. Using what you know about the topic, construct the elements listed below on a separate sheet of paper. (For this exercise it’s OK to play a bit loose with the facts.)

1. Your main claim (assigned) 2. 1-2 principal items of support for your claim (evidence, reasons, etc.)

3. A counter-argument: a reason/piece of evidence/argument that contradicts your claim and that you believe is not valid? a. A response to that counterargument: Why should we not accept the counterargument?

4. A concession: a reason/piece of evidence/argument that contradicts your claim, but that you believe has validity. a. A response to that counterargument: Why should we accept your claim in spite of your concessions?

Part B: Draft a paragraph using these elements Combine the elements from Part A into a paragraph into a brief argument for your claim.

Use the elements in the order that seems most effective. Pay attention to wording; in particular, be sure each move is phrased in a way that makes its rhetorical function clear to a reader (i.e., a claim should read like a claim; a concession should read like a concession). Your audience is your classmates.

If your group finishes before the rest of the class, work on refining your prose.

Claims to argue: 1. Duke administrators should formally discourage caffeine use for students.

2. Duke administrators should not discourage caffeine use for students.

3. Elementary school administrators should encourage a no-tv before bed policy.

4. Music at bedtime is not an effective for promoting better sleep for adolescents.

3