Question

how to use counterarguments in your persuasive pieces of writing:

Answer 1

Why utilize counter-arguement?

For what reason would you incorporate a counter-contention in your article? Doesn't that debilitate your contention?

As a matter of fact, no. Done well, it makes the contention more grounded. This is on the grounds that it allows you to react to your peruser's protests previously they have completed the process of perusing. It likewise demonstrates that you are a sensible individual who has thought about the two sides of the level headed discussion. Both of these make an article more convincing.

In what manner should a counter-arguement be introduced?

A counter-contention ought to be communicated altogether, decently and equitably. Don't simply compose a fast sentence and after that quickly counter it. Give reasons why somebody may really hold that view. A couple of sentences or even an entire passage isn't a preposterous measure of room to provide for the counter-contention. Once more, the fact of the matter is to demonstrate your peruser that you have thought about all sides of the inquiry, and to make it simpler to answer the counter-contention. It's simpler to react to a point you have just spelled out—and it's less demanding for your peruser to tail you.

Ensure you express the counter-contention decently and dispassionately. Inquire as to whether the individual who really holds this position would acknowledge your method for expressing it. Place yourself in their shoes and assume the best about them. Try not to utilize one-sided dialect or stack the deck while showing their position. Perusers see through that kind of thing before long.

Clearly, on the off chance that you truly trust the position communicated in your theory, you won't have the capacity to be totally objective by they way you express the counter-contention—however you should attempt. A standout amongst the most well-known reasons for counter-contention is to address positions that numerous individuals hold yet that you believe are mixed up. In this way you need to be deferential and assume the best about them regardless of whether you think their perspectives are off base. They'll be substantially more liable to be convinced at that point. (The other approach, to utilize mockery and parody to uncover mixed up thoughts, is capable, yet ought to be utilized with mind, particularly before you've aced the craft of talk.)

In what manner can a counter-arguemnt be refuted?

A standout amongst the best approaches to refute a counter-contention is to demonstrate that it depends on flawed presumptions. Either the realities aren't right, the investigation is mistaken, or the qualities it depends on are not satisfactory. Cases of each are given beneath. Moreover, some counter-contentions are basically superfluous, for the most part since they are really reacting to an alternate contention. What's more, some counter-contentions really make your contention more grounded, once you dissect their rationale.

These cases utilize a claim from James Loewen's book, Lies My Teacher Told Me. In that book Loewen makes the claim that "To work enough in community life … understudies must realize what causes bigotry" (143). The cases beneath are thoughts that you may use as a counter-contention to this claim, in a paper concurring with Loewen. At that point you would disprove, or reply, the counter-contention as an approach to reinforce your own position.