Strategies for Argument
Answering the Opposition
Using Different Strategies for
Argument
• The strategies for arguing on p. 305-324 of
Everyone’s an Author are all different ways to
support or explain your claim.
• Not every essay should use every strategy in
the chapter, but every essay should use some
of them.
Review of Strategy Types
• Analogy p. 305(make sure that the analogy isn’t a false
analogy – a logical fallacy on p. 297)
• Classification p. 307 – useful if you need to divide a large
group into smaller sub-groups.
• Comparison/Contrast p. 308
• Definition p. 311 – use if your audience may not be
familiar with terms, or if you are using very specific
definitions of common terms.
• Description p. 313 – use to create dominant impression,
put readers in the scene
• Example p. 315 – make complicated ideas real, back up
claim with real-world people the issue affects. (make sure
not to make any hasty generalizations from p. 297)
Review of Strategy Types
• Humor p. 317 – make sure that context/audience is appropriate
• Narration p. 319 – similar to example. Tell a story that makes the issue
real, presents a problem, opens up an issue for debate. Don’t,
however, only use narration to make your point.
• Problem/Solution p. 321 – Present your issue as a problem to be
solved. Make your audience see why it’s a problem.
• Reiteration p. 322 – A little bit of repetition can make your argument
much more compelling. Just know why you are repeating certain key
concepts/phrases, and ask peers/instructors if repetition is working for
you or against you.
• Which of these strategies do you see your sources using? Which
strategies can YOU use as you begin to shape your argument and draft
your essay?
Analyzing Model Arguments
• If you did not bring a source, you must use “Our Schools Must Do
Better” on p. 89 or “On Buying Local” on p. 92.
1. What is at stake in each of these essays? (See p. 279 in EaA)
2. Summarize the claim the essay is making in your own words and
identify where the claim is in the essay by quoting it and giving it
credit.
3. Summarize the author’s major points of support for the thesis
(each essay has at least two, maybe more). Were you convinced
by these points?
4. Discuss the essay’s use of logos, ethos, and pathos. Identify a
place where the author used at least two of these different
strategies, and tell me why you think this was a use of
logos/ethos/pathos. Do you think the balance of logos, ethos, and
pathos was effective and convincing?
5. Which strategies from p. 305-324 does your source use to support
the various claims it makes? (There might be more than one.)
Answering the Oppposition
• No argument occurs in a vacuum. Everyone comes to
most topics with some already formed opinions or
ideas in the back of their minds. Your job as a
persuasive writer is to anticipate the most common of
those ideas and to refute them.
• Refute: to prove false or erroneous (mistaken). Prove a
person to be in error.
• As you do your research, you will encounter ideas on
both sides of your argument. Keep track of BOTH
SIDES so that when you pick a side, you will already
know what the most common arguments for the other
side are.
Example of an Answer to the
Opposition:
• Here is an example, summarized from a book by Kim Chernin about
women and the pressure to be thin.
• Chernin’s claim: The pressure to be thin is harmful to women.
• The naysayer/opposition’s argument: Some say that losing weight helps a
woman feel better about herself and have more confidence, so this
pressure to be thin is actually helpful, not harmful.
• Chernin’s answer to the opposition: This boost in confidence is only
temporary. A vast percentage of women who lose weight gain it back and
then some, making the gain in self-confidence temporary and putting
women in a worse position than they were in to begin with. Therefore, the
pressure to be thin is still harmful.
• By including a naysayer (an opposing view) in her argument, Chernin
strengthens her original stance.
Example of an Answer to the
Opposition:
• Here is an example from p. 76-77 of Everyone’s an Author from an essay
written by Jennifer Delahunty, a college admissions officer.
• Delahunty’s claim: College admissions officers take their job seriously and
consider each candidate carefully.
• The naysayer/opposition’s argument: Some say that college admissions
officers are “cavalier” (too offhanded or dismissive) about students’
applications because there are so many applicants.
• Delahunty’s answer to the opposition: She tells a story about how much
time the admissions officers spent looking at applications (twelve hours a
day), and she tells an even more specific story about one student about
whom the admissions offices had a debate before admitting her.
• Throughout the story, Delahunty shows sympathy and admiration for the
applicants, which refutes the opposition’s claim that admissions officers
are “cavalier.”
• By including a naysayer (an opposing view) in her argument, Delahunty
strengthens her original stance.
When Answering an Opposing
Argument…
• Be fair. Summarize the opposing argument in a
way that someone who holds it would
recognize and agree with.
• Avoid making unkind judgments about the
people who hold the opposing opinion.
• Make sure that your answer (refutation) of the
opposing argument is strong and relevant.
(Don’t just dismiss the opposing argument
with “that doesn’t matter.)
Answering the Opposition
• Remember, the purpose of planting a Naysayer in
your essay is to show that you are aware of the
other side’s argument, aware that not everyone is
going to agree with you immediately, and that
you have an answer for those arguments or
objections.
• This means that you need to make sure that your
argument is stronger for having included the
naysayer because you have answered the
opposition.
Answering the Opposition Practice
• Identify a claim that a source, or a person interviewed in a
source, makes that you disagree with for good reasons.
• Write a paragraph where you:
1. Set up the debate. Give the audience the context they
need to understand your claim, the opposition, and your
response.
2. Make YOUR claim.
3. Summarize/quote the claim from your opposition, giving
credit in MLA format and identifying it as the opposition.
4. Answer the opposition’s claim with your good reasons for
disagreement.
Context and Claim:
• For many years, various sports teams have
used images of Native Americans as mascots.
There is growing opposition to the use of
these mascots, with Native American activists
arguing that the mascots are both offensive
and stereotypical. The owners of these sports
teams with Native American mascots should
listen carefully to the people whose images
they are making money off of, and if the
mascot is offensive, it should be retired.
Summary of Opposition
• Some people who oppose the change and believe
that teams should keep their mascots worry that
to change the mascots would set a precedent
that would allow any group that was offended by
a mascot for any frivolous reason to demand a
change. According to Dave Zirin, a common
version of this argument is, “‘Changing the name
of the Redskins and the Seminoles...where does
the politically correct madness end? Do we stop
using 'Giants' because it offends tall people? Or
'Cowboys' because it offends cowboys?’"
Answer to the Opposition
• This argument may sound convincing, but it contains a
logical fallacy. It is an argument by false analogy. To
compare “tall people,” or “cowboys,” who are not
discriminated against in any measurable way to Native
Americans who have been systematically oppressed and
experienced the erasure of their cultures and their
languages is insulting. There are no groups advocating for
the rights of “tall people,” and to seriously suggest that
changing Native American mascots would invite these kinds
of frivolous demands is a “slippery slope” argument that
dismisses legitimate concerns and avoids recognizing the
real problem: the racist stereotypes being perpetuated by
the mascots in question.
For many years, various sports teams have used images of Native Americans as
mascots. There is growing opposition to the use of these mascots, with Native
American activists arguing that the mascots are both offensive and stereotypical.
The owners of these sports teams with Native American mascots should listen
carefully to the people whose images they are making money off of, and if the
mascot is offensive, it should be retired. Some people who oppose the change
and believe that teams should keep their mascots worry that to change the
mascots would set a precedent that would allow any group that was offended by
a mascot for any frivolous reason to demand a change. According to Dave Zirin, a
common version of this argument is, “‘Changing the name of the Redskins and
the Seminoles...where does the politically correct madness end? Do we stop
using 'Giants' because it offends tall people? Or 'Cowboys' because it offends
cowboys?’“ This argument may sound convincing, but it contains a logical fallacy.
It is an argument by false analogy. To compare “tall people,” or “cowboys,” who
are not discriminated against in any measurable way to Native Americans who
have been systematically oppressed and experienced the erasure of their cultures
and their languages is insulting. There are no groups advocating for the rights of
“tall people,” and to seriously suggest that changing Native American mascots
would invite these kinds of frivolous demands is a “slippery slope” argument that
dismisses legitimate concerns and avoids recognizing the real problem: the racist
stereotypes being perpetuated by the mascots in question.