Thesis: “Race and the Drug War” is more persuasive than “The New Jim Crow” because it has more
relevant and representative evidence, although they have equally strong reasoning.
Counter-argument: “The New Jim Crow” is more persuasive.
Purpose: Consider opposing views and show why they are wrong.
Structure: First paragraph presents the opposing view (counter-argument proper). Second paragraph
shows why that opposing view is wrong (rebuttal).
Ways you can make a counter-argument
1. Add new information (some idea or fact that you have not yet talked about in your essay). Might
be from one of the articles or it might be from outside the articles (your own
knowledge/beliefs/ideas).
a. New information about the evidence in one or the other article
b. New information about the assumptions. For example, looking at an assumption in one
or both of the articles that you have not already talked about.
2. Re-interpret something already discussed. Look at the same idea or fact from a new angle.
a. Re-interpret something to do with the evidence (example: a different take on why a
certain piece of evidence is/is not representative).
b. Re-interpret one of the assumptions (example: why someone might agree with an
assumption you disagree with, or vice versa).
Checklist for C-A and Rebuttal
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Can you tell what the thesis of the paper is?
Is the c-a directly opposing the thesis?
Does the c-a provide specific examples?
Does it explain those examples?
Does it use key terms (sufficient, relevant, representative; assumptions)?
Does the rebuttal answer the specific point in the c-a?
Does it address the examples in the c-a?
Does it use key terms?