Example 1
The biggest refutation to my hypothesis of grass fields being safer than turf fields is of course that grass fields are more dangerous. This seems obvious to a lot of people; grass fields are choppy and unkempt. Well, this isn’t the case for NFL stadiums. They literally hire people to keep the field in great playing conditions.
Author’s Position: In the NFL, grass fields are safer than artificial turf.
Your Worthy Opponent Says: Grass fields are choppy and unkempt.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Unmask the False Analogy that NFL fields are like high school fields.
Explanation: Common knowledge is incorrect. People’s concerns about grass turf, the Author can suggest, are derived from their experience of amateur, collegiate, or high school fields of play. Those concerns don’t apply to playing surfaces in the NFL, which are pristine.
Additional Notes: We can indicate with signal phrases that we’re making a rebuttal argument without directly signaling “the biggest refutation to my hypothesis.”
- I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
- I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
- And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.
Revised:
Critics of natural grass playing surfaces like to cite the woeful condition of their neighborhood high school field to illustrate the danger to athletes’ ankles and knees. Granted, those fields suffer a lot of abuse, and playing on them after several home games in a row is hazardous. It’s even true that many school districts have replaced their grass fields with artificial turf because they can’t afford the high cost of maintaining perfect grass. But the NFL, for the sake of reducing player injuries, is willing and able to make that continuing investment.
Example 2
Having a college degree can give a graduate the opportunity to receive higher paying salaries and stable incomes. A college degree can also give a student the potential to receive higher raises. Not every student who receives a degree gets a stable income. Student A attended college, received a degree, and found a career that had a stable salary. Student C attended college, received a degree, and found a job that offered salaries that do not pay enough to pay off student’s expenses. The push to try to make students attend college is leaving many students optioning out the “build your own business” idea, which is the idea many of the billionaires in today’s society had.
Author’s Position: Some, but not all, college degrees are good financial investments.
Your Worthy Opponent Says: On average, college degrees pay off.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Unmask the False Conclusion that students should be encouraged by “average outcomes.”
Explanation: Readers should be unable to escape the comparison between Student A and Student C, two graduates in different disciplines whose outcomes should not be “averaged.”
Additional Notes: The more appropriate comparison is between Graduates, not Students. Debt becomes a burden after graduation, when it needs to be repaid.
- I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
- I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
- And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.
Defenders of expensive college degrees like to point out that “college graduates, on average, earn $750,000 more than non-graduates in their lifetimes.” And it is true that certain graduates in high-paying fields do thrive. But it is also true that when Bill Gates pulls up a stool at his local bar, he raises the “average income” of all the patrons by tens of millions of dollars without actually benefiting any of his drinking buddies. So, the fact that Graduate A, whose MBA launches her directly into a well compensated financial services job, can easily repay her student loans, does not benefit Graduate C, whose new degree in the philosophy of philology lands him no job at all, even though their degrees were equally expensive.
Example 3
It is sometimes hard to believe that a device used to alert you of a fire is actually causing them. There have been some reported fires that have started due to a detector, which have not been researched to see what actually caused the fire. An article titled “Fire services on alert after smoke detector is blamed for causing two blazes,” published by Daily Mail, provides two cases in the United Kingdom where smoke detectors caught fire inside houses. Fire investigators on the case say they are on the side of caution because of these incidents and are taking the situation very seriously. These detectors were installed by fire services for a fire prevention safety campaign.
Author’s Position: Not only do smoke detectors not always alert residents to home fires, they sometimes actually cause fires.
Your Worthy Opponent Says: Smoke detectors are “slam dunk” beneficial devices for home safety.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Paint the divergent opinion into a corner.
Explanation: In itself, an anecdote about a faulty smoke detector wouldn’t be persuasive, but failure of the Ideal Smoke Detector probably will be.
Additional Notes: This is the third argument in a row for which the Rebuttal Position is represented by the fairly weak Straw Man of “common knowledge.” The better paper would find a legitimate, credentialed spokesperson for the Rebuttal Position and then obliterate
that point of view. I found someone to take the fall.
- I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
- I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
- And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.
No one would deny the value of smoke detectors for preventing tragic loss of life from home fires. But they are not the “slam dunk” always-beneficial devices safety professionals commonly declare them to be. Battery-operated models work only when they’re charged. Hard-wired models operate only if they’re properly installed. Short-circuits in wired models can actually spark fires. And homeowners are notorious for choosing bad locations for detectors, or installing them poorly, or failing to maintain them.
But the clearest indication that detectors are not foolproof occurred in 2011 in Humberside, England. British fire professionals had selected the Fire Angel ST 620 for its “ground-breaking” smoke detection technology and its 10-year power pack. Local firefighters installed more than half a million of these smoke alarms for free in homes throughout the UK in a massive public safety initiative. Despite their high quality and the reliable installations, these devices, when they sounded their low-battery warning, were uninstalled by homeowners and then spontaneously caught fire. Chris Blacksell, Humberside’s Director of Safety, was forced to admit: “We have contacted every fire service in the country to find out if there have been any other incidents involving detectors [and] have decided to not fit that type of detector until our investigation is complete.”
Example 4
The video also claims that nothing short of an enthusiastic “Yes!” qualifies as consent. Anything along the lines of “okay” or “sure” would therefore not be valid. But again, has every person that has answered in such a half-hearted manner felt as though they were raped?
Author’s Position: The definition of rape as
sex without consent is a bar so low that no one can engage in sex without fear of committing a crime.
Your Worthy Opponent Says: Consent, even between loving partners, is rarely unambiguous, and rarely continuous, and even when it is, the sex partner cannot know it, so most sex takes place without
known consent, and that is rape by the current too-inclusive definition.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Reduce the definition of consent to absurdity.
“No means no” was a functioning definition of rape that served us well for decades. Any sex act that proceeded following a “no” was rape. The sex partner who heard the “no” was obliged to suspend intimacy or proceed with a crime. Such terms were manageable. Today, the sex partner is at a loss to know whether a crime is being committed or not, because to proceed without knowing that continuous unambiguous consent is being granted is to risk being accused of rape. Sex without consent can occur without a “no” being uttered. Rape can take place any time a “yes” is not being heard. It’s no longer the obligation of the less interested partner to say “Stop this now.” Instead, it’s the obligation of the more interested partner to hear, without interruption, a constant chorus of “Yes! Oh God, yes!”
Example 5
So how does that apply to people whose skin color is white or lighter but are not even white? they are Hispanic, African American, or any other ethnicity. This is an ongoing issue because people who are multiracial have been told that they have the privilege and that they are treated better because they are not fully one of the ethnicity. But how is anyone supposed to know what privilege is if they all believe it is only based on a lighter skin color.
Author’s Position: Multiracial Americans are uniquely oppressed because they are stigmatized by at least two races.
Your Worthy Opponent Says: Multiracial Americans, are advantaged over black or Latino Americans because they enjoy the privileges of being white.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Expose the duplicity of the argument.
Explanation: Failure to acknowledge discrimination in others is a fatal flaw in those who argue their own discrimination.
- I’ll use blue to highlight signal phrases that indicate there are other points of view.
- I’ll use red for accommodations that show respect for the divergent viewpoint.
- And I’ll use green to indicate where the rebuttal begins.
Surely no one wants to be treated badly, but that doesn’t prevent minorities from competing for the distinction of being “the most oppressed.” Black Americans rank their suffering against that of Latino Americans, who assert their relative oppression by the majority culture against the deprivation status of Asian or Arabic immigrants. Each group has reason to believe that members of other groups enjoy privileges denied to others. Even aggrieved majority white Americans assert that they suffer from reverse discrimination. At the heart of all such assertions is the underlying claim that members of other races “can’t understand what it’s like” to live in another’s skin. The obvious irony of the argument that multiracial individuals are privileged by their part-white ethnicity is that it’s made by people who “can’t understand what it’s like” to live at the juncture between two ethnic cultures.
In-Class Exercise 1
Background: American public schools are funded primarily by local property taxes on the homes and businesses in their own neighborhoods.
Not only do these children endure difficult lives at home, for low-income areas often lack resources, they are being sent to school to endure even more difficulty with developing and learning. The middle class seems to be dissipating as the gap between the rich and the poor grows wider and wider. Funding has been cut a tremendous amount and in some states, pre-K education has been cut entirely and some schools had to deny some kids from attending school due to population. The states have not hesitated to cut funding, yet they haven’t made any true effort to gain money to support the schools. Most of the children from poor areas come to school without having eaten breakfast, or having just encountered secondhand smoke, abuse, or neglect, dressed in thin, poor clothing and torn shoes. The bottom line is that their lives are difficult enough. Why should they suffer even more in the place they are supposed to succeed? In the place they have a right to succeed? Everybody talks about the gap, but nobody does anything to fix the gap, or even attempt to do so. Children from these areas are dropping out of high school before they graduate. There were about 3 million teens in 2009 that did not have a high school diploma or were not enrolled in school at all. The drop out rate for low-income students is five times greater than the drop out rates of high-income schools: 7.4%. High school dropouts are not able to apply for 90% of the world’s jobs. This means that children from low-income areas are denied a job that pays enough to support them before they even get a chance to get an interview for the job; they are turned down on the spot, and it is all because of the lack of funding in low-income communities.
What is the Author’s Position? Keep it short.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? State it positively like any other reasonable claim.
The Rhetorical Strategy: What would be the best strategy to refute the claim?
Explanation: Explain if needed.
In-Class Exercise 2
Background: Adderall is prescribed millions of times to treat hyperactivity, attention deficit, and obsessive-compulsive behaviors, particularly in youth.
This is where the problem starts, depending on the drug to make you perform, rather than relying on what you are normally equipped with to perform. The purpose for the pill is being put into effect, but what happens if the pill is not there? An article titled, “Adderall Addiction and Abuse” posted by the Addiction center states, “The brain of an addicted person is dependent on Adderall to stimulate alertness and productivity. Without Adderall, addicted people often feel tired and mentally foggy. These are symptoms of Adderall withdrawal, a strong sign of an addiction.” Someone who relies on this artificial performance, after receiving the skills they have obtained through the drug, can act like a bubble pop when the drug is taken away. It becomes a way of life. You take that pill everyday because the doctor prescribed it, and now you are reliant on that pill to succeed. Take coffee as an example, I’m sure many people insist that coffee is what gets them through the day. Without this coffee, they would be useless.
What is the Author’s Position? Keep it short.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? State it positively like any other reasonable claim.
The Rhetorical Strategy: What would be the best strategy to refute the claim?
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
Assignment – authors position – Children who go to schools that are funded by their own neighborhoods aren’t getting the resources they need and are therefore dropping out of school earlier than expected. Opponents argument – enough attention isn’t given to the idea of receiving funding from other reliable sources.
Maybe Expose the Duplicity – I notice that a lot is being repeated and emphasized on moral grounds about student health and is generalized about student health
Maybe unmask false conclusion- surely not every child is going through what the text describes but the author makes it seem as though this is happening.
Authors Position: Prescribed Adderall for ADHD produces dependency and addiction.
What Does Opponent Say: Adderall is very important for providing help against hyperactivity and making people more productive.
Best strategy: Unmask the false conclusion that Adderall is more helpful for this with ADHD than harmful.
Explanation: The drug itself produces the productivity for those suffering with ADHD, but it does not magically give them the skills for being productive without the drug. Without it, you are a victim of drowsiness and lack of mental clarity. This creates the need to be under the effects of the drug, which creates the dependency, the tell-tale sign of addiction.
What is the Author’s Position?: People with hyperactivity, attention deficit, and obsessive-compulsive behaviors rely heavily on Adderall, ultimately creating an addiction. / People are becoming dependent on a drug (Adderall) rather than “relying on what you are normally equipped with to perform.”
What does the worthy opponent say?: The drug provides people with the ability to receive skills that are necessary to perform.
The Rhetorical Strategy: emphasize that Adderall, unlike coffee, is many times taken as needed, rather than on a daily basis
– Exercise 2
Authors’ Position: Adderall is becoming a problem for children as many become addicted to it and rely heavily on its effects to get through the day.
Opponent: The drug benefits children as it makes them alert and productive whereas they would otherwise be tired and mentally foggy.
Rhetorical Strategy: Unmask the false conclusion that Adderall is more helpful than harmful to children.
EXAMPLE 1
-Author’s Position: The lack of funding for schools in low-income areas creates a difficult environment to succeed in, causing high school drop-outs and more low-income jobs.
-Worthy Opponent: Parents need to work harder to pay for their kids’ education and push them through school.
-Rhetorical Strategy: Reduce to absurdity
-Explanation: As a counterargument, explain the unfair system, again, and how it is nearly impossible to break the cycle without help, like more funding.
The author’s position in Exercise 2 is that instead of giving children addictive medication like Adderall to remedy their ADHD, we should teach them tips for dealing with the disability with what they are normally equipped with.
A worthy opponent may say that Adderall helps those with ADHD to great extents and is more positive than negative. It improves the quality of their lives.
A rhetorical strategy that would refute this claim would be to find ways that Adderall harms children and convince the reader that the negatives outweigh the positives.
In-Class Exercise 2:
Author’s Position: Adderal is an effective drug to aid in the treatment of attention deficit disorders and boosts productivity.
What does the worthy opponent say: Adderal is an addictive drug that shouldn’t be relied on to boost productivity levels, but instead we should rely on what our bodies are naturally given to help increase our productivity.
The rhetorical strategy: Expose the duplicity of the argument or unmask the false analogy that Adderal is like coffee.
Explanation: By exposing the duplicity of the argument you could make the argument that painting Adderal in the way this author does will hurt more people than help as many people truly have to take the drug to help them focus through everyday life.
Explanation: Exposing the false analogy that coffee is just like Adderal would be another way to refute the argument. Coffee is a quick surge of caffeine that you have to drink several times a day to feel alert. Meanwhile, there are several different types of Adderal that all aim to give the user long-lasting focus throughout the day.
Author’s Position: Adderal creates an addiction among prescribed users.
Opponent: Just like anybody people prescribed Adderal need it to combat their symptoms. Almost all drugs involve some relief and effect on a person’s body. Adderal is no different.
Rhetorical Strategy: Emphasize the need for the drug. People aren’t always normally equipped with the skills to perform.
Exercise #2
What is the Author’s Position? People rely on Adderall, so they start to have withdrawals when it is taken away from them.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Adderall is needed to help the hyperactive youth focus and able to do what they want to do.
The Rhetorical Strategy: A little over exaggerating to push the other opinion into a corner
#1
What is the Author’s Position: Children that grow up in low income households and communities are at a disadvantage in regard to their education, their ability to obtain future jobs, and live a healthy life.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say: They are at a disadvantage because the families contribute less in taxes to their local school system.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Expose the wage gap.
Explanation: The gap between the rich and poor is growing wider each day, completely terminating the middle class. Communities that are considered poor, have no choice but to wisely pick and choose what to spend their money on. Because jobs don’t usually hire from these poorer communities, the cycle of staying in the unwealthy wage gap will remain the same.
What is the Author’s Position?
Adderal is addictive and easy to become dependent on
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say?
Some people need adderal to be able to get through their daily lives, and is more positive than negative
The Rhetorical Strategy:
Reveal the false conclusion that adderal is helpful, and is actually more hurtful
Explanation:
People prescribed adderal often show symptoms of withdrawal when not on the drug, which is a glaring sign of addiction
Authors Position: Those prescribed Adderall may become addicted, and rely on the drug in order to perform everyday tasks.
Worthy Opponent: Adderall helps those prescribed to do everyday tasks.
Rhetorical Strategy: Reliance on drugs to perform everyday tasks is both physically and mentally harmful, and can have serious side effects.
Explanation: Adderall may fix the attention issues, but it doesn’t magically give those who are prescribed the skills to do their tasks. Just because someone is alert and focused, doesn’t mean they know what they are doing. Once you start, it’s that much harder to stop.
#2
Authors position- Adderall causes individuals to rely on the drug and when stopped withdrawal sets in
Opponent- People that are prescribed Adderall need it to focus and improve their ability to complete their goals each day
Rhetorical strategy- Unveil the false conclusion that Adderall is more helpful than harmful especially to people who struggle with ADHD
Authors position- dependency and addiction is produced when Adderall is prescribes for ADHD .
What Does Opponent Say- Adderall is very important for providing help against hyperactivity and helping people more productive especially with learned or attention disorders.
Best strategy: Reveal the false conclusion that Adderall is more helpful for this with ADHD than harmful.
Explanation: The drug Adderall itself produces the productivity for those suffering with ADHD, but does not magically provide the skills for being productive without the drug. Meaning without the drug? you are a victim of drowsiness and lack of mental clarity. Thus creating a dependency to be under the effects of the drug, which in time leads to addiction.
What is the Author’s Position? Schools in low-income areas offer challenges to getting an education and should be given more public funding.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Funding in most public schools is based on property taxes in the area, it would be unfair to give some special treatment.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Paint the divergent opinion into a corner.
Explanation: The opponents want to argue that the government can’t intervene more because funding is already outlined using tax revenue, though this is an unfair practice that the children in no way can decide. It is then these children who suffer and can never make it out of the circle of poverty they were forced into. To blame the children for the faults of the adults would be too unforgiving.
Authors Position: Students who live in low-income areas are not given a chance to succeed in life, due to inferior funding put in their school systems.
What Does The Worthy Opponent Say: Parents in low-income areas need to push their kids more to get them to succeed in school.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Reduce the wage gap between high and low income areas.
Explanation: By increasing the amount of funding low-income school districts receive, schools can increase the odds that that a student will succeed in school. Families in low-income areas don’t get a choice in regards to where they send their kids to school, and they shouldn’t be punished for their schools lack of funding.
Exercise #1
What is the Author’s Position? Students with lower incomes are being forced to go to school even though schools are not much better than their life outside the classroom.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Schools need to start a program that engages all types of students and not focus attention on middle and high-class students.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Fix the gap between low and high class
Explanation: Slowly, the middle class is dispersing. Americans all over the country are now either low or high-class. Families in the lower class have to pick and choose where to spend their money. Something must be implemented that helps bring low-income families to higher standards without punishing higher-class families.
What is the Author’s Position? Adderall’s are needed in order to control hyper activeness and create productivity particularly within the youth.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? These drugs can cause addiction, which will lead them to be ineffective if they ever find themselves without taking the Adderalls.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Adderalls have long lasting effects on a person unlike coffee. people who take these drugs have time limits indicating how long the drug lasts and when It needs to be taken again.
In Class Exercise 2
Author’s Position: Relying on drugs like adderall to perform is a problem rather than relying on what’s natural to function because it could cause effects like withdraws and being unproductive.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? All drugs can be beneficial but cause effects to a person.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Provide information on the benefits adderall brings to argue the assumption that is harmful.
The author position is in exercise 2, instead of giving children addictive medication.That we should teach them tips for dealing with the disability with normally equipped with.What does the oppwnt say?That Adderall is needed to help hyperactive youth focus and do what they want to do.The Rhetorical Strategy:A little over exaggerating into other opinion in a corner
In-Class Exercise 1:
* Author’s position: Education in low income areas lack the funding to help their students succeed.
* What does a worthy opponent say?: The funding of schools is based on a number of different factors, and those who lack the motivation to do well in school shouldn’t get any special treatment.
* The Rhetorical Strategy: Paint the divergent opinion into a corner.
* Explanation: The author just saying that kids drop out of their schools isn’t all that persuasive, but the statistics that are used can help back their logic up.
What is the Author’s Position?: The commonly prescribed drug Adderall leads to addiction in its users.
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say?: Though unwanted consequences are common, drugs are meant to be helpful.
The Rhetorical Strategy: Reveal that drug dependence is an unwanted consequence.
What is the Author’s Position? There needs to be more funding in low income communities
What Does the Worthy Opponent Say? Families contribute less with taxes towards their local school system.
The Rhetorical Strategy: close the gap
Explanation: Reducing the wage gap between high and low income by supplying low income communities