purpose of refutation in essay

Hill Street Studios/Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

Examples and Observations

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

Indirect and Direct Refutation

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

Cicero on Confirmation and Refutation

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

Richard Whately on Refutation

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

FCC Chairman William Kennard's Refutation

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

Etymology: From the Old English, "beat"

Pronunciation: REF-yoo-TAY-shun

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

Definition of Refutation

Types of refutation, refutation through evidence, refutation through logic, refutation through exposing discrepancies, examples of refutation in literature, example #1: elements of rhetoric (by richard whately).

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

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

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

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

Function of Refutation

Post navigation.

English Current

ESL Lesson Plans, Tests, & Ideas

• North American Idioms
• Business Idioms
• Idioms Quiz
• Idiom Requests
• Proverbs Quiz & List
• Phrasal Verbs Quiz
• Basic Phrasal Verbs
• North American Idioms App
• A(n)/The: Help Understanding Articles
• The First & Second Conditional
• The Difference between 'So' & 'Too'
• The Difference between 'a few/few/a little/little'
• The Difference between "Other" & "Another"
• Check Your Level
• English Vocabulary
• Verb Tenses (Intermediate)
• Articles (A, An, The) Exercises
• Prepositions Exercises
• Irregular Verb Exercises
• Gerunds & Infinitives Exercises
• Discussion Questions
• Speech Topics
• Argumentative Essay Topics
• Top-rated Lessons
• Intermediate
• Upper-Intermediate
• Reading Lessons
• View Topic List
• Expressions for Everyday Situations
• Travel Agency Activity
• Present Progressive with Mr. Bean
• Work-related Idioms
• Adjectives to Describe Employees
• Writing for Tone, Tact, and Diplomacy
• Speaking Tactfully
• Advice on Monetizing an ESL Website
• Teaching your First Conversation Class
• How to Teach English Conversation
• Teaching Different Levels
• Teaching Grammar in Conversation Class
• Members' Home
• Update Billing Info.
• Cancel Subscription
• North American Proverbs Quiz & List
• North American Idioms Quiz
• Idioms App (Android)
• 'Be used to'" / 'Use to' / 'Get used to'
• Ergative Verbs and the Passive Voice
• Keywords & Verb Tense Exercises
• Irregular Verb List & Exercises
• Non-Progressive (State) Verbs
• Present Perfect vs. Past Simple
• Present Simple vs. Present Progressive
• Past Perfect vs. Past Simple
• Subject Verb Agreement
• The Passive Voice
• Subject & Object Relative Pronouns
• Relative Pronouns Where/When/Whose
• Commas in Adjective Clauses
• A/An and Word Sounds
• 'The' with Names of Places
• Understanding English Articles
• Article Exercises (All Levels)
• Yes/No Questions
• Wh-Questions
• How far vs. How long
• Affect vs. Effect
• A few vs. few / a little vs. little
• Boring vs. Bored
• Compliment vs. Complement
• Die vs. Dead vs. Death
• Expect vs. Suspect
• Experiences vs. Experience
• Go home vs. Go to home
• Had better vs. have to/must
• Have to vs. Have got to
• I.e. vs. E.g.
• In accordance with vs. According to
• Lay vs. Lie
• Make vs. Do
• In the meantime vs. Meanwhile
• Need vs. Require
• Notice vs. Note
• 'Other' vs 'Another'
• Pain vs. Painful vs. In Pain
• Raise vs. Rise
• So vs. Such
• So vs. So that
• Some vs. Some of / Most vs. Most of
• Sometimes vs. Sometime
• Too vs. Either vs. Neither
• Weary vs. Wary
• Who vs. Whom
• While vs. During
• While vs. When
• Wish vs. Hope
• 10 Common Writing Mistakes
• 34 Common English Mistakes
• First & Second Conditionals
• Comparative & Superlative Adjectives
• Determiners: This/That/These/Those
• Check Your English Level
• Grammar Quiz (Advanced)
• Vocabulary Test - Multiple Questions
• Vocabulary Quiz - Choose the Word
• Verb Tense Review (Intermediate)
• Verb Tense Exercises (All Levels)
• Conjunction Exercises
• List of Topics
• Business English
• Games for the ESL Classroom
• Pronunciation
• Teaching Your First Conversation Class
• How to Teach English Conversation Class

Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation

An argumentative essay presents an argument for or against a topic. For example, if your topic is working from home , then your essay would either argue in favor of working from home (this is the for  side) or against working from home.

Like most essays, an argumentative essay begins with an introduction that ends with the writer's position (or stance) in the thesis statement .

Introduction Paragraph

(Background information....)

• Thesis statement : Employers should give their workers the option to work from home in order to improve employee well-being and reduce office costs.

This thesis statement shows that the two points I plan to explain in my body paragraphs are 1) working from home improves well-being, and 2) it allows companies to reduce costs. Each topic will have its own paragraph. Here's an example of a very basic essay outline with these ideas:

• Background information

Body Paragraph 1

• Topic Sentence : Workers who work from home have improved well-being .
• Evidence from academic sources

Body Paragraph 2

• Topic Sentence : Furthermore, companies can reduce their expenses by allowing employees to work at home .
• Summary of key points
• Restatement of thesis statement

Does this look like a strong essay? Not really . There are no academic sources (research) used, and also...

You Need to Also Respond to the Counter-Arguments!

The above essay outline is very basic. The argument it presents can be made much stronger if you consider the counter-argument , and then try to respond (refute) its points.

The counter-argument presents the main points on the other side of the debate. Because we are arguing FOR working from home, this means the counter-argument is AGAINST working from home. The best way to find the counter-argument is by reading research on the topic to learn about the other side of the debate. The counter-argument for this topic might include these points:

• Distractions at home > could make it hard to concentrate
• Dishonest/lazy people > might work less because no one is watching

Next, we have to try to respond to the counter-argument in the refutation (or rebuttal/response) paragraph .

The Refutation/Response Paragraph

The purpose of this paragraph is to address the points of the counter-argument and to explain why they are false, somewhat false, or unimportant. So how can we respond to the above counter-argument? With research !

A study by Bloom (2013) followed workers at a call center in China who tried working from home for nine months. Its key results were as follows:

• The performance of people who worked from home increased by 13%
• These workers took fewer breaks and sick-days
• They also worked more minutes per shift

In other words, this study shows that the counter-argument might be false. (Note: To have an even stronger essay, present data from more than one study.) Now we have a refutation.

Where Do We Put the Counter-Argument and Refutation?

Commonly, these sections can go at the beginning of the essay (after the introduction), or at the end of the essay (before the conclusion). Let's put it at the beginning. Now our essay looks like this:

Counter-argument Paragraph

• Dishonest/lazy people might work less because no one is watching

Refutation/Response Paragraph

• Study: Productivity  increased by 14%
• (+ other details)

Body Paragraph 3

• Topic Sentence : In addition, people who work from home have improved well-being .

Body Paragraph 4

The outline is stronger now because it includes the counter-argument and refutation. Note that the essay still needs more details and research to become more convincing.

Working from home may increase productivity.

Extra Advice on Argumentative Essays

It's not a compare and contrast essay.

An argumentative essay focuses on one topic (e.g. cats) and argues for or against it. An argumentative essay should not have two topics (e.g. cats vs dogs). When you compare two ideas, you are writing a compare and contrast essay. An argumentative essay has one topic (cats). If you are FOR cats as pets, a simplistic outline for an argumentative essay could look something like this:

• Thesis: Cats are the best pet.
• are unloving
• cause allergy issues
• This is a benefit >  Many working people do not have time for a needy pet
• If you have an allergy, do not buy a cat.
• But for most people (without allergies), cats are great
• Supporting Details

Use Language in Counter-Argument That Shows Its Not Your Position

The counter-argument is not your position. To make this clear, use language such as this in your counter-argument:

• Opponents might argue that cats are unloving.
• People who dislike cats would argue that cats are unloving.
• Critics of cats could argue that cats are unloving.
• It could be argued that cats are unloving.

These  underlined phrases make it clear that you are presenting  someone else's argument , not your own.

Choose the Side with the Strongest Support

Do not choose your side based on your own personal opinion. Instead, do some research and learn the truth about the topic. After you have read the arguments for and against, choose the side with the strongest support as your position.

Do Not Include Too Many Counter-arguments

Include the main (two or three) points in the counter-argument. If you include too many points, refuting these points becomes quite difficult.

If you have any questions, leave a comment below.

- Matthew Barton / Creator of Englishcurrent.com

Additional Resources :

• Writing a Counter-Argument & Refutation (Richland College)
• Language for Counter-Argument and Refutation Paragraphs (Brown's Student Learning Tools)

EnglishCurrent is happily hosted on Dreamhost . If you found this page helpful, consider a donation to our hosting bill to show your support!

24 comments on “ Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation ”

Thank you professor. It is really helpful.

Can you also put the counter argument in the third paragraph

It depends on what your instructor wants. Generally, a good argumentative essay needs to have a counter-argument and refutation somewhere. Most teachers will probably let you put them anywhere (e.g. in the start, middle, or end) and be happy as long as they are present. But ask your teacher to be sure.

Thank you for the information Professor

how could I address a counter argument for “plastic bags and its consumption should be banned”?

For what reasons do they say they should be banned? You need to address the reasons themselves and show that these reasons are invalid/weak.

Thank you for this useful article. I understand very well.

Thank you for the useful article, this helps me a lot!

Thank you for this useful article which helps me in my study.

Thank you, professor Mylene 102-04

it was very useful for writing essay

Very useful reference body support to began writing a good essay. Thank you!

Really very helpful. Thanks Regards Mayank

Thank you, professor, it is very helpful to write an essay.

It is really helpful thank you

It was a very helpful set of learning materials. I will follow it and use it in my essay writing. Thank you, professor. Regards Isha

Thanks Professor

This was really helpful as it lays the difference between argumentative essay and compare and contrast essay.. Thanks for the clarification.

This is such a helpful guide in composing an argumentative essay. Thank you, professor.

This was really helpful proof, thankyou!

Thanks this was really helpful to me

This was very helpful for us to generate a good form of essay

thank you so much for this useful information.

Thank you so much, Sir. This helps a lot!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

30 Refutation Examples

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]

Learn about our Editorial Process

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

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

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

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

Below is a range of methods of refutation.

Refutation Examples

1. analogical disproof.

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

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

2. Test of Consistency

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

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

See More: Consistency Examples

3. Rebuttal by Cause and Effect

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

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

See More: Cause and Effect Examples

4. Prioritization of Evidence

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

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

5. Challenge the Relevance

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

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

See More: Relevance Examples

6. Statistical Refutation

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

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

7. Appeal to Common Sense

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

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

See More: Examples of Common Sense

8. Pointing Out Oversimplification

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

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

See More: Oversimplification Examples

9. Dismantling a False Dilemma

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

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

See More: False Dilemma Examples

10. Rebuttal through Definition

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

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

See More: Rebuttal Examples

11. Rebuttal by Precedence

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

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

12. Challenge the Representativeness

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

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

13. Rebuttal through Syllogism

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

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

14. Pointing Out Non-Sequitur

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

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

15. Rebuttal by Exception

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

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

16. Evidence-Based Counterargument

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

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

See More: Counterargument Examples

17. Logical Analysis

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

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

18. Reductio ad Absurdum

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

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

19. Counterexamples

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

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

20. Question the Source

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

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

See More: Best Sources to Cite in Essays

21. Alternative Explanation

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

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

22. Challenge Assumptions

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

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

See More: Assumptions Examples

23. Ethical or Moral Challenge

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

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

24. Using Comparison to Demonstrate Flawed Arguments

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

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

25. Highlight Omissions

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

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

26. Reframe the Debate

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

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

27. Historical or Precedent-Based Refutation

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

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

28. Practical Implications

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

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

See Also: Implications Examples

29. Question Motives or Bias

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

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

See Also: Types of Bias

30. Seek Expert Testimony

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

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

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

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Class Group Name Ideas (for School Students)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 19 Top Cognitive Psychology Theories (Explained)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 119 Bloom’s Taxonomy Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ All 6 Levels of Understanding (on Bloom’s Taxonomy)

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

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

• 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.

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

Unit 6: Argumentative Essay Writing

41 Counterargument and Refutation Development

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

Identifying Counterarguments

There are many ways to identify alternative perspectives.

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

Example Argument

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

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

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

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

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

Example Counterargument paragraph

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

Example Refutation paragraph

Counterargument and refutation stems.

Below are the stems organized in a table.

Watch this video

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

From: Karen Baxley

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

Academic Writing I Copyright © by UW-Madison ESL Program; Heidi Evans; Andrea Poulos; and Becky Tarver Chase is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• All Insights
• Top-Rated Articles
• How-to Guides
• For Parents

Understanding Refute: What It Means and How It Works

Discover the meaning and functionality of refute with this comprehensive guide.

Exploring the Definition of Refute

Refute is a verb that means to prove something to be false or incorrect. When you refute a statement or an argument, you provide evidence or logical reasoning that contradicts or disproves it. Refutation is an essential part of critical thinking and debate, as it allows for the examination and evaluation of different perspectives.

In the context of discussions or debates, refutation involves presenting counterarguments and evidence to challenge the validity or accuracy of a claim. It requires careful analysis and research to identify flaws, inconsistencies, or weaknesses in the opposing argument. By refuting an argument, you aim to demonstrate its fallacies or lack of evidence, ultimately weakening its credibility.

Refuting an argument requires a thorough understanding of the topic at hand and the ability to present compelling evidence or logical reasoning. It often involves analyzing facts, statistics, expert opinions, and logical fallacies to dismantle the opposing argument effectively. Refutation can be done through various methods, such as providing counterexamples, pointing out logical inconsistencies, or questioning the reliability of sources.

In summary, the definition of refute is to disprove or contradict a statement or argument through evidence or logical reasoning. It is a critical skill that allows for the evaluation and examination of different perspectives, promoting deeper understanding and intellectual growth.

Understanding the Purpose of Refute

The purpose of refute is to challenge and question the validity of a statement or argument. It serves as a means to critically analyze different viewpoints and promote intellectual growth. By engaging in refutation, you can identify weaknesses, inconsistencies, or fallacies in arguments, leading to a more accurate understanding of the topic at hand.

Refutation is an essential tool in academic and intellectual discourse. It helps to foster critical thinking skills and encourages individuals to question information and claims presented to them. By actively seeking to refute arguments, you can develop a more well-rounded perspective and avoid accepting information blindly.

Furthermore, the purpose of refute extends beyond individual growth and understanding. It plays a crucial role in public debates, political discussions, and scientific research. By engaging in refutation, individuals can challenge misleading or false information, contributing to the advancement of knowledge and the development of more informed societies.

In conclusion, the purpose of refute is to critically analyze and challenge statements or arguments in order to promote intellectual growth, foster critical thinking skills, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge.

Examining the Process of Refutation

The process of refutation involves several steps to effectively challenge and disprove an argument. To begin, it is crucial to thoroughly understand the argument being presented and identify its main claims or assertions. This requires careful reading, research, and analysis of the supporting evidence and sources.

Once you have a clear understanding of the argument, you can proceed with the process of refutation. This typically involves identifying any logical fallacies, inconsistencies, or weaknesses in the argument. Common fallacies include ad hominem attacks, false cause and effect reasoning, and appeals to emotion or authority.

After identifying the flaws in the argument, you can begin to gather evidence or logical reasoning to support your refutation. This may involve conducting further research, consulting reliable sources, or presenting counterarguments that address the weaknesses or fallacies in the original argument.

When presenting your refutation, it is essential to remain respectful and logical. Avoid personal attacks or emotional responses, as these can weaken your credibility. Instead, focus on presenting well-reasoned arguments, supported by evidence and logical analysis.

It is also important to consider the context and audience when engaging in refutation. Tailor your arguments and evidence to the specific audience, addressing their concerns, values, and prior knowledge. This can help make your refutation more persuasive and impactful.

In summary, the process of refutation involves understanding the argument, identifying flaws or weaknesses, gathering evidence or logical reasoning, presenting a well-reasoned refutation, and considering the context and audience. By following this process, you can effectively challenge and disprove arguments.

Analyzing the Benefits of Refute

Refutation offers several benefits in both personal and intellectual contexts. Firstly, it promotes critical thinking skills by encouraging individuals to question and analyze information critically. By actively seeking to refute arguments, individuals develop the ability to evaluate evidence, identify fallacies, and form well-reasoned opinions.

Furthermore, refutation helps individuals to develop a more well-rounded perspective on various topics. By engaging with and refuting different arguments, individuals gain exposure to different viewpoints and can consider a broader range of perspectives. This promotes intellectual growth and prevents individuals from accepting information blindly.

Refutation also plays a vital role in academic and intellectual discourse. It encourages healthy debate, where ideas can be rigorously tested and refined. By engaging in refutation, individuals contribute to the advancement of knowledge, as flawed arguments are challenged, and more accurate understanding is achieved.

Additionally, refutation serves as a tool for identifying and combating misinformation or false claims. By actively engaging in refutation, individuals can help prevent the spread of misleading information and promote the dissemination of accurate and reliable knowledge.

In conclusion, the benefits of refutation include the promotion of critical thinking skills, the development of a well-rounded perspective, contributions to the advancement of knowledge, and combating misinformation. By engaging in refutation, individuals can enhance their intellectual abilities and contribute to a more informed society.

Implementing Refute in Different Scenarios

Refutation can be implemented in various scenarios to challenge and question arguments. In academic settings, students are often encouraged to engage in refutation as part of their critical thinking and analytical skills development. This can involve analyzing academic papers, presenting counterarguments, and participating in classroom debates.

In public debates or political discussions, refutation plays a crucial role in challenging misleading or false claims. By actively engaging in refutation, individuals can help promote accurate information and prevent the spread of misinformation. This is particularly important in the age of social media and the rapid dissemination of information.

Furthermore, refutation is highly relevant in scientific research. Peer review, a critical component of the scientific process, involves the refutation of research findings. Scientists scrutinize and challenge each other's work to ensure the validity and reliability of scientific knowledge.

Refutation can also be implemented in everyday conversations and discussions. By actively seeking to challenge and question arguments, individuals can promote critical thinking, deepen their understanding of different topics, and contribute to more meaningful and informed conversations.

In summary, refutation can be implemented in academic settings, public debates, scientific research, and everyday conversations. By engaging in refutation in these different scenarios, individuals can enhance critical thinking skills, promote accurate information, and contribute to more meaningful discourse.

Related Insights

Learn public speaking: what hook is and what are its common types (part 2), how to win british parliamentary debate competitions learn what meta-debating is and how to use it with caution, learn public speaking: what hook is and what are its common types (part 1).

• 5 Prep Tips for BP
• Top Speech Introductions
• Public Speaking and Debate Competitions
• Incorporating Humor
• Logical Fallacies
• How-To: Prepare for Debate Tournaments
• How-To: Judge a Debate
• How-To: Win a BP Debate
• How-To: Win An Argument
• How-To: Improve at Home
• Team China Wins World Championship
• Ariel Wins Tournament
• Jaxon Speaks Up
• Tina Improves

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Rebuttal Sections

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.

In order to present a fair and convincing message, you may need to anticipate, research, and outline some of the common positions (arguments) that dispute your thesis. If the situation (purpose) calls for you to do this, you will present and then refute these other positions in the rebuttal section of your essay.

It is important to consider other positions because in most cases, your primary audience will be fence-sitters. Fence-sitters are people who have not decided which side of the argument to support.

People who are on your side of the argument will not need a lot of information to align with your position. People who are completely against your argument—perhaps for ethical or religious reasons—will probably never align with your position no matter how much information you provide. Therefore, the audience you should consider most important are those people who haven't decided which side of the argument they will support—the fence-sitters.

In many cases, these fence-sitters have not decided which side to align with because they see value in both positions. Therefore, to not consider opposing positions to your own in a fair manner may alienate fence-sitters when they see that you are not addressing their concerns or discussion opposing positions at all.

Organizing your rebuttal section

Following the TTEB method outlined in the Body Paragraph section, forecast all the information that will follow in the rebuttal section and then move point by point through the other positions addressing each one as you go. The outline below, adapted from Seyler's Understanding Argument , is an example of a rebuttal section from a thesis essay.

When you rebut or refute an opposing position, use the following three-part organization:

The opponent’s argument : Usually, you should not assume that your reader has read or remembered the argument you are refuting. Thus, at the beginning of your paragraph, you need to state, accurately and fairly, the main points of the argument you will refute.

Your position : Next, make clear the nature of your disagreement with the argument or position you are refuting. Your position might assert, for example, that a writer has not proved his assertion because he has provided evidence that is outdated, or that the argument is filled with fallacies.

Your refutation : The specifics of your counterargument will depend upon the nature of your disagreement. If you challenge the writer’s evidence, then you must present the more recent evidence. If you challenge assumptions, then you must explain why they do not hold up. If your position is that the piece is filled with fallacies, then you must present and explain each fallacy.

Module: Academic Argument

Formula for refutation and rebuttal, learning objective.

• Recognize strategies for rebuttal and refutation of counterargument

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 to help you be more accurate and to avoid locking you into an absolute claim

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.

• Rebuttal and Refutation. Provided by : University of Mississippi. Project : PLATO Project. License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

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

4.5 Identifying Concessions and Counter Arguments

Learning objectives.

• Identify the parts of a reasonable concession
• Evaluate paragraphs for concessions
• Apply concession format to a series of sentences

Let’s take some time to learn how to concede logical points and then counter them appropriately. These skills are INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. Oftentimes, only the strongest and most confident writers can write in a concession style. Your use of concession-style thesis statements and concessions throughout a response signals to your readers that you are a confident and capable writer and critical thinker. Concessions are invaluable to DISCOURSE and DIALOGUE, the two most important parts of responsible argumentation.

The purpose of this chapter and its activities is to teach you how to concede strong points and, more importantly, how to counter them effectively.  Students new to writing arguments often think that including concessions will weaken their argument or that a reader will be more likely to agree with them if they pretend that no weaknesses exist in the argument. This assumption is untrue. In fact, your willingness to admit where the prompt writer’s argument has value and either present an extension of that argument or move it in a different direction is really impressive.

What is more, you will be learning to grow comfortable in conceding that your own argument might have limitations. All arguments have limitations, whether they belong to a prompt writer or to you. Remember the final instruction given to you before all prompt responses (Goal #3)?

Your Task:  compose a critical response essay—including, ideally, an introduction, at least three body paragraphs, and a conclusion—to the text below

Goals:  your essay should include the following:

• A brief summary of the author’s argument
• mostly agree with the author  and  provide your own persuasive assertions that  extend support for the author’s position
• mostly disagree with the author  and  provide your own persuasive assertions that  defend your counter-position
• Your refutation of  at least one  objection a reader might have to  your  argument (or any point therein)

At a very basic level, the purpose behind learning counter-arguments is because the prompt instructions on each prompt ask you to do so.  The goal of that instruction is to teach you how to strengthen your argument.  Acknowledging weaker points (or strong points from your opposition) makes your writing more compelling because it demonstrates to your reader that 1) you have actually considered the topic without making snap judgments, and 2) you are not hiding the weaknesses of your argument from your reader, hoping that they will miss them.

More importantly, it creates an honest relationship between you and your reader, which is essential because some audiences will know something about the topic of your argument already, and they could have oppositions to offer.  Ultimately, you need to learn how to concede and counter in writing because you cannot respond to a reader’s objections verbally, as you might in a conversation.  The greater challenge is to anticipate the objections and respond to them before they come up. This strategy is akin to an artist writing a diss track in which they not only identify faults in their rival but also in themselves. What ammunition is left for their rival in response? When you “anticipate and defend,” there is little left for the opposition. It is a proven strategy.

To begin the process, we need to understand how to make reasonable concessions first.  It’s likely that you may have already learned how to make one of these two types of concessions early in your WRIT course, but let’s look over them again.

First, read the following prompt below.  You can also Download a PDF version (68.7 KB) if you prefer.

Drink Your Way to Success by Randolph Hennepin

The following editorial appeared in the May/June 2024 issue of Today’s Student

     Success in just about any profession often depends on a person’s ability to network, and to develop contacts. A prime way to network is over drinks. In fact, a person who does not drink is less likely to be successful than one who does . Students who spend time drinking rather than studying are ensuring their eventual success.

     Facts are facts. A recent study “found drinkers earn between 10 and 14 percent more than non-drinkers.” Further, according to the same study, men who go to a bar at least once a month earn an additional 7 percent. The reason for the success of drinkers, according to the author of the study, is that “Social drinking builds social capital. Social drinkers are networking, building relationships and adding contacts to their [phones] that result in bigger paycheques.”

     Perhaps this study is not good news for people who do not drink. Perhaps these people feel that there are other ways to develop contacts, such as getting involved in charitable organizations or meeting colleagues for breakfast instead of in a bar after work. While these strategies do have merit, neither is as effective as the social networking that occurs while drinking.

     In fact, a reasonable conclusion from this study would be to encourage students to learn how to drink. Knowing how to drink without embarrassing oneself is a key skill in business, as the above study proves. Therefore, students should not feel guilty about spending evenings drinking instead of working or studying, since drinking will lead to their eventual success. Students should not focus on school other than to do well enough to pass; otherwise, they are doomed to earn less than their peers who put their study time to good use by hitting the bottle.

Now, look at these straightforward responses to the prompt and determine which one uses a  general concession and which one uses a  specific concession .

• Introduction: Version 1

In “Drink Your Way to Success,” Randolph Hennepin argues that students need to focus more on drinking than studying in order to be successful in their future professions and careers.  Hennepin justifies this position by suggesting that social drinkers tend to be better at social networking and, because of this, tend to build better social capital with others in their professions, as well as earn more money over their careers.   Although Hennepin makes some good points, his argument is flawed.   If students focus more on drinking than studying, as Hennepin suggests, they will likely never do well enough in their courses to get into their profession in the first place.  Focusing on drinking rather than studying will lead to students who are less likely to graduate and less likely to achieve success in the workplace.

• Introduction: Version 2

In “Drink Your Way to Success,” Randolph Hennepin argues that students need to focus more on drinking than studying in order to be successful in their future professions and careers.  Hennepin justifies this position by suggesting that social drinkers tend to be better at social networking and, because of this, tend to build better social capital with others in their professions, as well as earn more money over their careers.  While it may be true that building up social capital is important for some professions, stating that students should focus on drinking instead of studying will not necessarily lead to eventual success . If students focus more on drinking than studying, as Hennepin suggests, they will likely never do well enough in their courses to get into their profession in the first place.  Focusing on drinking rather than studying will lead to students who are less likely to graduate and less likely to achieve success in the workplace.

Activity 1: Identifying Concessions

Which introduction in the above example uses a more specific concession? Vote on your choice below and then view the results. Click the accordion below to learn more.

The purpose behind the concession is two-fold:

• It provides your reader with a clear indication that you are shifting from your summary of the author’s position to your argument or response to the position.
• It is the first indication of a possible concession and counter-argument that you might make in your body paragraphs.

Now, while the first paragraph offers a modicum of concession (“the author makes some good points”), it doesn’t acknowledge what good points the author might have made, which makes it a weaker concession. Remember that the point here is to acknowledge that, even though you might not agree with the author, you clearly understand the reasonable elements of the argument. The second option offers a much clearer concession.

The next section includes practice activities for concessions and counterarguments.

Putting the Pieces Together Copyright © 2020 by Andrew M. Stracuzzi and André Cormier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Find Study Materials for

• Explanations
• Business Studies
• Combined Science
• Computer Science
• Engineering
• English literature
• Environmental Science
• Human Geography
• Macroeconomics
• Microeconomics
• Social Studies
• Browse all subjects
• Textbook Solutions
• Read our Magazine

Create Study Materials

• Flashcards Create and find the best flashcards.
• Notes Create notes faster than ever before.
• Study Sets Everything you need for your studies in one place.
• Study Plans Stop procrastinating with our smart planner features.

Debate is naturally adversarial. While the main objective is to thoroughly convince the audience of your perspective, the other major objective is to try to disprove your opponent’s stance. There are multiple ways you can do this, but the goal in a debate is to refute the opposing argument .

Create learning materials about Refutation with our free learning app!

• Instand access to millions of learning materials
• Flashcards, notes, mock-exams and more
• Everything you need to ace your exams
• 5 Paragraph Essay
• Argumentative Essay
• Cues and Conventions
• English Grammar
• English Language Study
• Essay Prompts
• Essay Writing Skills
• Global English
• History of English Language
• International English
• Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics
• Language Acquisition
• Language Analysis
• Language and Social Groups
• Lexis and Semantics
• Linguistic Terms
• Listening and Speaking
• Multiple Choice Questions
• Research and Composition
• Action Verbs
• Adjectival Clause
• Adverbial Clause
• Anthropomorphism
• Appositive Phrase
• Argument from Authority
• Argumentation
• Auditory Description
• Basic Rhetorical Modes
• Begging the Question
• Building Credibility
• Causal Flaw
• Causal Relationships
• Cause and Effect Rhetorical Mode
• Central Idea
• Chronological Description
• Circular Reasoning
• Circumlocution
• Classical Appeals
• Classification
• Close Reading
• Coherence Between Sentences
• Coherence within Paragraphs
• Coherences within Sentences
• Complex Rhetorical Modes
• Compound Complex Sentences
• Concessions
• Concrete Adjectives
• Concrete Nouns
• Consistent Voice
• Counter Argument
• Definition by Negation
• Description
• Description Rhetorical Mode
• Direct Discourse
• Equivocation
• Extended Metaphor
• False Connections
• False Dichotomy
• False Equivalence
• Faulty Analogy
• Faulty Causality
• Fear Arousing
• Gustatory Description
• Hasty Generalization
• Illustration
• Induction Rhetoric
• Levels of Coherence
• Line of Reasoning
• Missing the Point
• Modifiers that Qualify
• Modifiers that Specify
• Narration Rhetorical Mode
• Non-Sequitur
• Non-Testable Hypothesis
• Objective Description
• Olfactory Description
• Paragraphing
• Parenthetical Element
• Participial Phrase
• Personal Narrative
• Placement of Modifiers
• Post-Hoc Argument
• Process Analysis Rhetorical Mode
• Red Herring
• Reverse Causation
• Rhetorical Fallacy
• Rhetorical Modes
• Rhetorical Question
• Rhetorical Situation
• Scare Tactics
• Sentimental Appeals
• Situational Irony
• Slippery Slope
• Spatial Description
• Straw Man Argument
• Subject Consistency
• Subjective Description
• Tactile Description
• Tense Consistency
• Tone and Word Choice
• Transitions
• Twisting the Language Around
• Unstated Assumption
• Verbal Irony
• Visual Description
• Rhetorical Analysis Essay
• Single Paragraph Essay
• Sociolinguistics
• Summary Text
• Synthesis Essay
• Textual Analysis

Refutation Definition

To refute something is to give evidence that proves it is untrue or impossible. A refutation is the act of definitively proving something wrong.

Refutation vs. Rebuttal

Although they’re often used interchangeably, refutation and rebuttal do not mean the same thing.

A rebuttal is a response to an argument that tries to prove it untrue by offering a different, logical perspective.

A refutation is a response to an argument that decisively demonstrates that the opposing argument cannot be true.

Neither of these terms should be confused with the made-up word “refudiate,” which has come to loosely mean to deny or refuse something. Although this word entered the public lexicon in 2010 after a US politician used it to argue their point, it’s not preferable for academic writing.

The difference between a refutation and rebuttal hinges on whether the opposite argument can be conclusively disproved. To do so, you must provide factual evidence of its inaccuracy; otherwise, it isn’t a refutation, it’s a rebuttal.

Refutation Examples

There are three specific ways to successfully refute an argument: through evidence, logic, or minimization.

Refutation Through Evidence

A good argument stands on evidence, whether that’s statistical data, quotes from an expert, firsthand experiences, or any objective findings of a topic. Just as an argument can be built up by evidence that supports it, an argument can be destroyed by evidence that disproves it.

Evidence can refute an argument by:

Definitively supporting the accuracy or truth of the opposing argument when it is an either-or discussion (i.e., argument A and argument B cannot both be true).

Some people argue that remote education is just as good as in-person instruction, but numerous studies have linked a rise in behavioral issues to young students in remote learning situations. Unless we argue that a child’s well-being is irrelevant, remote education is not “just as good as” in-person schooling.

Definitively disproving the truth of the argument with more recent or more accurate evidence.

In one of the courtroom scenes in To Kill a Mockingbird (1960) by Harper Lee, Atticus Finch uses evidence to refute the possibility of Tom Robinson’s being able to beat Mayella Ewell:

…[T]here is circumstantial evidence to indicate that Mayella Ewell was beaten savagely by someone who led most exclusively with his left. We do know in part what Mr. Ewell did: he did what any God-fearing, preserving, respectable white man would do under circumstances—he swore a warrant, no doubt signing with his left hand, and Tom Robinson now sits before you, having taken the oath with the only good hand he possesses—his right hand. (Chapter 20)

This evidence essentially makes it impossible for Tom Robinson to have been the attacker because he cannot use the hand that is known to have beaten Mayella. In a fair trial, this evidence would have been monumental, but Atticus knows there is emotional and illogical prejudice facing Tom because of his race.

Refutation Through Logic

In a refutation through logic, an argument can be discredited because of a flaw in logic, which is called a logical fallacy .

A logical fallacy is the use of flawed or incorrect reasoning to construct an argument. Because many arguments find their basis in a logical structure, a logical fallacy essentially refutes the argument unless it can be proven by another means.

Suppose someone makes the following argument:

“Books always have more information about what the characters are thinking than movies. The best stories are those that offer lots of insight into what the characters are experiencing. Therefore, books will always be better at storytelling than movies.”

There is a logical fallacy in this argument, and can be refuted like this:

The premise—that the best stories are those that include the character’s thoughts—is not logically solid because there are many acclaimed stories that do not include the characters’ thoughts at all. Take, for example, the film The Sound of Music (1965) ; there is no internal narrative coming from the characters, and yet this is a beloved story and classic movie.

As a result of the logical fallacy, the conclusion—that books are better at telling stories than movies—can be refuted unless the arguer presents a more logically sound argument. When the premise does not support the conclusion, this is called a non-sequitur, which is a type of logical fallacy.

Refutation Through Minimization

Refutation by minimization occurs when the writer or speaker points out that the opposing argument is not as central to the issue as their opponent thought. This might be because it is a more peripheral, or less-important concern.

This type of refutation is effective because it essentially proves that the opposing argument is not relevant to the discussion and can be dismissed.

Consider the following argument:

“Only women can write characters in the opposite gender with any depth, because for centuries they have been reading books written by men, and therefore have more insight into the opposite sex.”

This argument can easily be refuted by minimizing the pivotal premise (i.e., writers have a difficult time writing characters of the opposite gender).

The assumption that a writer must share the same gender as their characters to have the insight to fully develop their personality is a mistake. There are countless examples of beloved characters written by members of the opposite gender to suggest otherwise; Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy ( Anna Karenina (1878)) , Victor Frankenstein by Mary Shelley ( Frankenstein (1818)), and Beatrice by William Shakespeare ( Much Ado About Nothing (1623)), to name just a few.

Concession and Refutation

It might seem counterintuitive to mention the opposing viewpoints in your argument, but a concession can really help convince an audience to agree with you. By including a concession with your argument, you illustrate that you have a solid understanding of the entire scope of your topic. You show yourself to be a well-rounded thinker, which helps eliminate concerns of a bias.

Concession is a rhetorical device where the speaker or writer addresses a claim made by their opponent, either to acknowledge its validity or to offer a counterargument to that claim.

If someone presents not only a solid argument in their favor, but also a concession of the opposing side(s), then their argument is that much stronger. If that same person can also refute the opposing argument, then that’s essentially a checkmate to the opponent.

Four basic steps to refutation can be remembered with the four S's:

Signal : Identify the claim you are answering ( “They say…” )

State : Make your counterargument ( “But…” )

Support : Offer support for your claim (evidence, statistics, details, etc.) ( “Because…” )

Summarize : Explain the importance of your argument ( “Therefore…” )

Refutation in Writing Argumentative Essays

To write an effective argumentative essay , you must include a thorough discussion of the issue—especially if you want your reader to believe that you understand the discussion at hand. This means you must always address the opposing viewpoint(s) by writing a concession. A concession to the opposition builds your credibility, but you shouldn’t stop there.

Argumentative essays contain the following key elements:

A debatable thesis statement , which outlines the main argument and some evidence to support it.

An argument, which breaks down the thesis into individual parts to support it with evidence, reasoning, data, or statistics.

A counterargument, which explains the opposing viewpoint.

A concession, which explains the way(s) in which the opposing view could contain some truth.

A rebuttal or refutation, which gives reasons why the opposing viewpoint is not as strong as the original argument.

If you intend to provide a refutation of the counterargument, then a thorough concession is not especially necessary or effective.

When you refute an argument, the audience will essentially have to agree that that argument is no longer valid. That doesn’t necessarily mean that your argument is the only option left, though, so you must continue to provide support for your argument.

Refutation Paragraph

You can place the refutation anywhere in the body of your essay. A few common places are:

In the introduction, before your thesis statement .

In the section right after your introduction in which you explain a common position on the subject that needs to be re-examined.

Within another body paragraph as a way to address smaller counterarguments that arise.

In the section right before your conclusion in which you address any potential responses to your argument.

When you’re presenting a refutation, use words like, “however” and “although” to transition from acknowledging the opposition (the concession) to introducing your refutation.

Many people believe X. However, it is important to remember…

Although the common perception is X, there is evidence to suggest…

Part of writing an impactful refutation is keeping a respectful tone when discussing any counterarguments. This means avoiding harsh or excessively negative language when discussing the opposition, and keeping your language neutral as you transition from the concession to your refutation.

Refutations - Key Takeaways

• Refutation is the act of definitively proving something wrong.
• The difference between a refutation and rebuttal hinges on whether the opposite argument can be conclusively disproved.
• There are three specific ways to successfully refute an argument, and they are through evidence, logic, and minimization.
• A good argument will include a concession, which is where the speaker or writer acknowledges the opposing argument.
• In an argument, the concession is followed by a refutation (if possible).

Flashcards in Refutation 15

What does “refutation” mean?

Refutation is the action of definitively proving something wrong.

True or false: Refutation and rebuttal are the same thing.

_______ is  a response to an argument that tries to prove it untrue by offering a different, logical perspective. 

A __________ is a response to an argument that decisively demonstrates that the opposing argument cannot be true. 

What is the key difference between a rebuttal and a refutation?

The difference between a refutation and a rebuttal hinges on whether the opposite argument can be conclusively disproved.

The three types of refutation are:

Refutation through evidence

Refutation through minimization

Refutation through _______

Learn with 15 Refutation flashcards in the free Vaia app

We have 14,000 flashcards about Dynamic Landscapes.

Already have an account? Log in

Frequently Asked Questions about Refutation

What are types of refutations?

There are three types of refutations: refutation by evidence, refutation by logic, and refutation by minimization.

What is a refutation in writing?

Refutation in writing is the action of definitively proving something wrong.

How do I write a refutation paragraph?

Write a refutation paragraph with the four S’s: Signal, state, support, summarize. Begin by signaling the opposing argument, then state your counterargument. Next, offer support for your stance, and finally, summarize by explaining the importance of your argument.

Are concession and refutation counterclaims?

A refutation is a counterclaim because it makes a claim about the initial counterargument presented by your opponent. A concession is not a counterclaim, it is merely a recognition of the counterarguments to your argument.

What is refutation through logic and evidence?

Refutation through logic is the refutation or discredit of an argument by way of identifying a logical fallacy in an argument. Refutation through evidence is discrediting an argument by offering evidence that proves the claim is impossible.

Test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards

_______ is a response to an argument that tries to prove it untrue by offering a different, logical perspective. 

Join the Vaia App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!

Keep learning, you are doing great.

Discover learning materials with the free Vaia app

Vaia is a globally recognized educational technology company, offering a holistic learning platform designed for students of all ages and educational levels. Our platform provides learning support for a wide range of subjects, including STEM, Social Sciences, and Languages and also helps students to successfully master various tests and exams worldwide, such as GCSE, A Level, SAT, ACT, Abitur, and more. We offer an extensive library of learning materials, including interactive flashcards, comprehensive textbook solutions, and detailed explanations. The cutting-edge technology and tools we provide help students create their own learning materials. StudySmarter’s content is not only expert-verified but also regularly updated to ensure accuracy and relevance.

Vaia Editorial Team

Team English Teachers

• 9 minutes reading time
• Checked by Vaia Editorial Team

Study anywhere. Anytime.Across all devices.

Create a free account to save this explanation..

Save explanations to your personalised space and access them anytime, anywhere!

By signing up, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy of Vaia.

Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.

Join over 22 million students in learning with our Vaia App

The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place

• Flashcards & Quizzes
• AI Study Assistant
• Study Planner
• Smart Note-Taking

Privacy Overview

Get unlimited access with a free vaia account..

• Instant access to millions of learning materials.
• Flashcards, notes, mock-exams, AI tools and more.
• Everything you need to ace your exams.

Consider the following thesis for a short paper that analyzes different approaches to stopping climate change:

Climate activism that focuses on personal actions such as recycling obscures the need for systemic change that will be required to slow carbon emissions.

The author of this thesis is promising to make the case that personal actions not only will not solve the climate problem but may actually make the problem more difficult to solve. In order to make a convincing argument, the author will need to consider how thoughtful people might disagree with this claim. In this case, the author might anticipate the following counterarguments:

• By encouraging personal actions, climate activists may raise awareness of the problem and encourage people to support larger systemic change.  
• Personal actions on a global level would actually make a difference.  
• Personal actions may not make a difference, but they will not obscure the need for systemic solutions.  
• Personal actions cannot be put into one category and must be differentiated.

In order to make a convincing argument, the author of this essay may need to address these potential counterarguments. But you don’t need to address every possible counterargument. Rather, you should engage counterarguments when doing so allows you to strengthen your own argument by explaining how it holds up in relation to other arguments. 

How to address counterarguments 

Once you have considered the potential counterarguments, you will need to figure out how to address them in your essay. In general, to address a counterargument, you’ll need to take the following steps.

• State the counterargument and explain why a reasonable reader could raise that counterargument.  
• Counter the counterargument. How you grapple with a counterargument will depend on what you think it means for your argument. You may explain why your argument is still convincing, even in light of this other position. You may point to a flaw in the counterargument. You may concede that the counterargument gets something right but then explain why it does not undermine your argument. You may explain why the counterargument is not relevant. You may refine your own argument in response to the counterargument.  
• Consider the language you are using to address the counterargument. Words like but or however signal to the reader that you are refuting the counterargument. Words like nevertheless or still signal to the reader that your argument is not diminished by the counterargument. 

Here’s an example of a paragraph in which a counterargument is raised and addressed.

Image version

The two steps are marked with counterargument and “counter” to the counterargument: COUNTERARGUMENT/ But some experts argue that it’s important for individuals to take action to mitigate climate change. In “All That Performative Environmentalism Adds Up,” Annie Lowery argues that personal actions to fight climate change, such as reducing household trash or installing solar panels, matter because change in social behavior can lead to changes in laws. [1]  

COUNTER TO THE COUNTERARGUMENT/ While Lowery may be correct that individual actions can lead to collective action, this focus on individual action can allow corporations to receive positive publicity while continuing to burn fossil fuels at dangerous rates.

Where to address counterarguments 

There is no one right place for a counterargument—where you raise a particular counterargument will depend on how it fits in with the rest of your argument. The most common spots are the following:

• Before your conclusion This is a common and effective spot for a counterargument because it’s a chance to address anything that you think a reader might still be concerned about after you’ve made your main argument. Don’t put a counterargument in your conclusion, however. At that point, you won’t have the space to address it, and readers may come away confused—or less convinced by your argument.
• Before your thesis Often, your thesis will actually be a counterargument to someone else’s argument. In other words, you will be making your argument because someone else has made an argument that you disagree with. In those cases, you may want to offer that counterargument before you state your thesis to show your readers what’s at stake—someone else has made an unconvincing argument, and you are now going to make a better one. 
• After your introduction In some cases, you may want to respond to a counterargument early in your essay, before you get too far into your argument. This is a good option when you think readers may need to understand why the counterargument is not as strong as your argument before you can even launch your own ideas. You might do this in the paragraph right after your thesis. 
• Anywhere that makes sense  As you draft an essay, you should always keep your readers in mind and think about where a thoughtful reader might disagree with you or raise an objection to an assertion or interpretation of evidence that you are offering. In those spots, you can introduce that potential objection and explain why it does not change your argument. If you think it does affect your argument, you can acknowledge that and explain why your argument is still strong.

[1] Annie Lowery, “All that Performative Environmentalism Adds Up.” The Atlantic . August 31, 2020. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/08/your-tote-bag-can-mak…

• picture_as_pdf Counterargument

20: What is the Additional Information Essay‪?‬ The College Essay Advisors Podcast

Join Stacey and Becca as they discuss the role of the Additional Information Essay in the college application. They cover the purpose of this text box and the kinds of circumstances that warrant an essay, as well as the dangers of submitting a superfluous essay.Watch some of our YouTube videos:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MaLsIu1vdEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6VxiKDeqQcAccess our Supplemental Essay Guides:https://www.collegeessayadvisors.com/supplemental-essay-guide-2024-25/Work one-...

• More Episodes
• © 2024 The College Essay Advisors Podcast

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Americans’ Views of Government’s Role: Persistent Divisions and Areas of Agreement

Wide majorities of Biden and Trump supporters oppose cuts to Social Security

Table of contents.

• Views on the efficiency of government
• Views on the government’s regulation of business
• Confidence in the nation’s ability to solve problems
• Views on the effect of government aid to the poor
• Views on government’s role in health care
• Views on the future of Social Security
• Trust in government
• Feelings toward the federal government
• Acknowledgments
• The American Trends Panel survey methodology

Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand Americans’ attitudes about U.S. government, such as its size and role.

This report is based primarily on a survey of 8,709 adults, including 7,166 registered voters, from April 8 to 14, 2024. Some of the analysis in this report is based on a survey of 8,638 adults from May 13 to 19, 2024.

Everyone who took part in these surveys is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Here are the questions used for the report and its methodology .

While the economy, immigration and abortion have emerged as major issues in the 2024 election, Joe Biden and Donald Trump also have dramatically different ideas about the size and role of government.

These differences reflect decades-old divisions between Democrats and Republicans over the scope of government.

Among registered voters, large majorities of Biden supporters – roughly three-quarters or more – favor a bigger, more activist government.

• 74% say they would rather have a bigger government providing more services.
• 76% say government should do more to solve problems.
• 80% say government aid to the poor “does more good than harm.”

Trump supporters, by comparable margins, take the opposing view on all three questions.

The Pew Research Center survey of 8,709 adults – including 7,166 registered voters – conducted April 8-14, 2024, examines Americans’ views of the role and scope of government , the social safety net and long-term trends in trust in the federal government .

Democratic support for bigger government is little changed in the last five years but remains higher than it was a decade ago. Republicans’ views have shifted less over the last 10 years.

Among all adults, about three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents favor a bigger government, up from about six-in-ten in 2014 and 2015. The share of Republicans and Republican leaners who prefer a bigger government has increased only modestly over the same period.

Democratic support for bigger government, while slightly lower than in 2021 (78%), remains at nearly its highest level in five decades. During Bill Clinton’s presidency in the 1990s, fewer than half of Democrats said they preferred a bigger government with more services.

Voters continue to express very different views about government’s role in specific areas than about the government generally.

A large majority of voters (80%) – including 82% of Biden supporters and 78% of Trump supporters – say that in thinking about the long-term future of Social Security, benefits should not be reduced in any way.

However, Biden supporters are more likely than Trump supporters to say Social Security should cover more people with greater benefits.

• 46% of Biden supporters favor expanding Social Security coverage and benefits, compared with 28% of Trump supporters.

Most Americans (65%) continue to say the federal government has a responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage.

Democrats overwhelmingly (88%) say the federal government has this responsibility, compared with 40% of Republicans.

The share of Republicans who say the government has a responsibility to provide health coverage has increased 8 percentage points since 2021, from 32% to 40%.

There are wide income differences among Republicans in opinions about the government’s role in health care:

• 56% of Republicans with lower family incomes say the government has a responsibility to provide health coverage for all, compared with 36% of those with middle incomes and 29% of higher-income Republicans.

When asked how the government should provide health coverage, 36% of Americans say it should be provided through a single national program, while 28% say it should be through a mix of government and private programs. These views have changed little in recent years.

Democrats continue to be more likely than Republicans to favor a “single payer” government health insurance program (53% vs. 18%).

Other key findings in this report

• Americans’ trust in the federal government remains low but has modestly increased since last year. Today, 22% of American adults say they trust the government to do what is right always or most of the time, which is up from 16% in June 2023.
• While the public overall is divided over the nation’s ability to solve important problems, young adults are notably pessimistic about the country’s ability to solve problems . About half of Americans (52%) say the U.S. can’t solve many of its important problems, while 47% say it can find a way to solve problems and get what it wants. Roughly six-in-ten adults under age 30 (62%) say the nation can’t solve major problems, the highest share in any age group and 16 points higher than two years ago.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Election 2024
• Federal Government
• Government Spending & the Deficit
• Health Care
• Partisanship & Issues
• Social Security & Medicare
• Trust in Government

Third-party and independent candidates for president often fall short of early polling numbers

6 facts about presidential and vice presidential debates, biden, trump are least-liked pair of major party presidential candidates in at least 3 decades, cultural issues and the 2024 election, more than half of americans are following election news closely, and many are already worn out, most popular, report materials.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

Dropping Out Is Biden’s Most Patriotic Option

If he believes that Trump is a unique threat, the choice is clear.

Sign up for The Decision , a newsletter featuring our 2024 election coverage.

Joe Biden says he ran for president in 2020 because of Charlottesville. He says he ran because he saw the threat Donald Trump posed to the country and the threat he posed to democracy. If Biden truly believes that, he needs to end his reelection campaign. Indeed, dropping out could be the most patriotic gesture of his long career in public service, and every senior Democratic official and leader in the country should be pressuring him to act immediately.

Read: A disaster for Joe Biden

Throughout last night’s debate , Trump lied; obfuscated; and made bizarre, unsupported arguments about the economy, foreign policy, abortion, and the January 6 riot. A halfway competent opponent would have capitalized on these many, many errors. But Biden could barely speak coherently. The catastrophe of the incumbent’s performance is almost impossible to capture in words; you have to watch.

According to reporting by The New York Times , the campaign believed that the debate would “provide an opportunity to go on the offensive on issues like immigration and abortion access.” When asked about the latter—Biden’s best issue—he rambled about his worst issue, immigrant crime. You can read for yourself:

There’s many young women who’ve been—including the young woman who was just murdered and he went to the funeral—the idea that she was murdered by an immigrant coming in, they talk about that but here’s the deal, there’s a lot of young women being raped by their in-laws, by their spouses, brothers and sisters, it’s just ridiculous and they can do nothing about, they try to arrest them when they cross state lines.

Before the debate , the president spent a week with a full slate of advisers at Camp David: former Chief of Staff Ron Klain, current Chief of Staff Jeff Zients, White House senior adviser Anita Dunn, and campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon. This performance was rehearsed .

It should be the last straw. The president went into this debate as a historically unpopular candidate. At this point in his presidency, a lower percentage of Americans support him than have supported any other president since at least Harry Truman. He’s running behind Democratic candidates for Senate in Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin .

When the Times ’ Ezra Klein argued in February that Biden should step down , he was shot down by countless White House staff and Democratic leaders who claimed that Biden was up to the challenge of campaigning. And when Biden outperformed expectations at the State of the Union, speculation about his capacity to effectively campaign became more subdued.

But not anymore. Last night, Biden’s advisers were clearly underwhelmed with his performance; during the debate, they began leaking that he had a cold. After the event, when pressed repeatedly by Anderson Cooper on CNN, even Vice President Kamala Harris was forced to concede that the president’s showing had been lackluster. “He’s losing,” one prominent Democratic Party operative, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue, told me by direct message. “The campaign said this debate would help him and it did not. Now he has no credible argument for how he’s going to turn the race around by November, especially since the convention is going to be a shit show.”

The problem facing the country is twofold. First, because the primaries are over, Biden would have to voluntarily step aside; there’s no other way for his party to nominate someone else. And second, there’s a first-mover disadvantage at play. No one wants to stick out their neck and end up as the laughingstock of the party—as Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota did when he briefly challenged Biden for this year’s Democratic nomination. And for those closest to Biden—Jill Biden, Val Biden, Mike Donilon, Ted Kaufman, and all those who joined him at Camp David this week—the question will be whether they can put the needs of their country above their loyalty to the current president.

In their recent book, The Hollow Parties , the political scientists Daniel Schlozman and Sam Rosenfeld discuss the weakening of the Democratic and Republican establishments. In another age, no party apparatus would have allowed an aging, frail Joe Biden to get to this point. I recently asked Schlozman why the Democratic Party hasn’t simply replaced Biden—why Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison hasn’t called Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, or any number of other Democrats and tried to whip up support for them as potential replacements for Biden.

As a political scientist, Schlozman hates questions like this, so he answered me somewhat facetiously: He cited “the old joke of ‘Why is Profiles in Courage such a short book?’ ‘Because we don’t see these kinds of behaviors very much.’”

But what’s needed right now is exactly that kind of bravery: uncommon fortitude in the face of atrophied party institutions that have lost the power to prevent the rise of candidates such as Trump, and, more to the point, Biden’s continued presence in the race.

What exactly happens if Biden drops out? Well, there are two options. Either he drops out and endorses another candidate, or he allows the party to decide at the convention. Ideally, he would do the latter, to allow a competitive process to determine his successor as the Democratic nominee.

Either way, I have no illusions that any of this would be orderly. Speeding through a nominating process in a month and a half because the incumbent has decided he’s incapable of victory is going to be chaotic, and the Democrats could end up with a candidate with serious vulnerabilities.

But as Biden showed last night, the party most certainly has a flawed candidate now. The Democrats need to be able to find a nominee who’s actually able to mount a vigorous challenge to Trump and the singular threat he poses to American democracy.

Advertisement

Justices Limit Power of Federal Agencies, Imperiling an Array of Regulations

A foundational 1984 decision had required courts to defer to agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes, underpinning regulations on health care, safety and the environment.

• Share full article

By Adam Liptak

Reporting from Washington

• June 28, 2024

The Supreme Court on Friday reduced the power of executive agencies by sweeping aside a longstanding legal precedent, endangering countless regulations and transferring power from the executive branch to Congress and the courts.

The precedent, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council , one of the most cited in American law, requires courts to defer to agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes. There have been 70 Supreme Court decisions relying on Chevron, along with 17,000 in the lower courts.

The decision is all but certain to prompt challenges to the actions of an array of federal agencies, including those regulating the environment, health care and consumer safety.

The vote was 6 to 3, dividing along ideological lines.

“Chevron is overruled,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.”

In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said the ruling amounted to a judicial power grab. “A rule of judicial humility,” she wrote, “gives way to a rule of judicial hubris.”

Justice Kagan summarized her dissent from the bench, a rare move and a sign of profound disagreement. “Courts, in particular this court, will now play a commanding role” in setting national policy, she said.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .