purpose of refutation 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

• Confirmation in Speech and Rhetoric
• Usage and Examples of a Rebuttal
• What Is the Straw Man Fallacy?
• Elenchus (argumentation)
• Definition and Examples of Progymnasmata in Rhetoric
• Arrangement in Composition and Rhetoric
• The Parts of a Speech in Classical Rhetoric
• Definition and Examples of Procatalepsis in Rhetoric
• Narratio in Rhetoric
• Reductio Ad Absurdum in Argument
• Oration (Classical Rhetoric)
• What Is Digression?
• Learn How to Use Extended Definitions in Essays and Speeches
• What Is a Compound Verb?
• Invention (Composition and Rhetoric)
• listeme (words)

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.”

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.

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/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Definition of Refutation

The literary term refutation refers to that part of an argument where a speaker or a writer encounters contradicting points of view. Alternatively, refutation can be described as the negation of an argument , opinion, testimony, doctrine, or theory, through contradicting evidence . It normally constitutes a part of an essay that disproves the opposing arguments.

An important distinction to be appreciated is the difference between refutation and counter- argument . In the case of counter- argument , the writer acknowledges that there is substance in the contradicting argument , yet he provides evidence for his alleged stance. On the other hand, refutation goes a bit further by presenting evidence that in turn negates the opposing arguments.

In a circumstance in which the writer happens to agree with certain aspects of the opposing argument , he makes a concession . However, writers and speakers rarely employ concession , as it can very easily undermine their own stance.

Types of Refutation

There are various ways through which the tool of refutation can be employed. The three most common modes used for the purpose of incorporating the device of refutation in an argument are : (1) refutation through evidence , (2) refutation through logic, and (3) refutation through exposing the discrepancies of opposing argument .

Refutation through Evidence

For an argument to be counted as one of the valid examples of refutation through evidence , it needs to be an argument backed up by some form of evidence . In the absence of clear bases or justifications it cannot be declared valid. Therefore, a writer can refute a contradicting argument if he can provide evidence that conclusively negates it, or by presenting more recent or credible evidence .

Refutation through Logic

Refutation examples through logic are quite tricky to construct. It involves deconstructing the opposing argument , and presenting it in such a way as to highlight the discrepancies present within the argument . Most skilled writers check the validity of their arguments before publishing them. This makes refutation through logic all the more difficult. There is no denying the fact then that refutation through logic constitutes a difficult task at hand. However, writers have employed this tool in their respective writings.

Refutation through Exposing Discrepancies

The method involves showing that one of the contradicting arguments lacks the core ingredient of centrality to the issue as the opposition had intended to project. Also, the writer can logically present his argument as being superior to the one presented by the opposition, by showing that the opposition’s argument lacks the crucial link to the topic. Further, the writer can highlight the insignificance of the opposition’s argument by exposing the deficiencies found within the opposing argument .

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.”

This excerpt serves to illustrate the effectiveness of early refutation. The early placement of refutation within the extract has had an enhanced persuasive impact on the audience .

Function of Refutation

The tool of refutation has a crucial significance in writing. It is important in determining whether the speaker or writer has successfully persuaded his readers or not. Mostly, the device of refutation is employed when one is dealing with a controversial topic. It allows the reader to prefer one argument over another. The use of the device is frequently witnessed in intricate arguments.

Literary Devices

Literary devices, terms, and elements, definition of refutation, common examples of refutation.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, “When will you be satisfied?” We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality.

Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. Well, I say to them tonight, there’s not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America. There’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America.

—Barack Obama, 2004 DNC Keynote address

Significance of Refutation in Literature

Examples of refutation in literature.

PORTIA And you must cut this flesh from off his breast: The law allows it, and the court awards it. SHYLOCK Most learned judge! A sentence! Come, prepare! PORTIA Tarry a little; there is something else. This bond doth give thee here no jot of blood; The words expressly are ‘a pound of flesh:’ Take then thy bond, take thou thy pound of flesh; But, in the cutting it, if thou dost shed One drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods Are, by the laws of Venice, confiscate Unto the state of Venice.

( The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare)

What did her father do? We don’t know, but there 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.

GILES: My proof is there! Pointing to the paper : If Jacob hangs for a witch he forfeit up his property—that’s law! And there is none but Putnam with the coin to buy so great a piece. This man is killing his neighbors for their land! DANFORTH: But proof, sir, proof. GILES: Pointing at his deposition : The proof is there! I have it from an honest man who heard Putnam say it! The day his daughter cried out on Jacobs, he said she’d given him a fair gift of land.

( The Crucible by Arthur Miller)

The case in Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible concerns accusations of witchcraft against many of the inhabitants of the citizens of Salem. It is difficult to argue against these accusations, as there is almost no evidence that a person could show to prove he or she was not a witch. Instead, the character of Giles attempts to make an example of refutation by proving what someone else might have to gain by other citizens being accused and later killed for being witches. Giles’s refutation is that a man named Putnam stands to inherit the land, and therefore has supported false accusations for his own monetary gain. Unfortunately, as in To Kill a Mockingbird , this evidence toward a logical reason why there might be such a witch hunt cannot overcome the emotional fear of witches in the community.

Test Your Knowledge of Refutation

HERMIONE: Since what I am to say must be but that Which contradicts my accusation and The testimony on my part no other But what comes from myself, it shall scarce boot me To say ‘not guilty:’ mine integrity Being counted falsehood, shall, as I express it, Be so received. But thus: if powers divine Behold our human actions, as they do, I doubt not then but innocence shall make False accusation blush and tyranny Tremble at patience.

3. Consider the following passage from Arthur Miller’s The Crucible:

PROCTOR: He takes out a paper, and turns to Danforth : This is Mary Warren’s deposition….She swears now that she never saw Satan; nor any spirit, vague or clear, that Satan may have sent to hurt her. And she declares her friends are lying now.

Which of the following methods is Proctor trying to use to issue a refutation to the charges of witchcraft? A. Evidence in the form of a deposition. B. Emotional proof that none of the girls could have been telling the truth. C. A false piece of proof that the court will likely throw out in favor of better evidence. [spoiler title=”Answer to Question #4″] Answer: A is the correct answer.[/spoiler]

Unit 6: Argumentative Essay Writing

46 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 is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

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

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

• 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

Please log in to save materials. Log in

• Concessions
• Counterarguments
• ESL Writing

The Argumentative Essay: The Language of Concession and Counterargument

Explanations and exercises about the use of counterarguments and concessions in argumentative essays.

The Argumentative Essay:  The Language of Concession and Counterargument

We have already analyzed the structure of an argumentative essays (also known as a persuasive essay), and have read samples of this kind of essay.  In this session we will review the purpose and structure of an argumentative essay, and will focus on practicing the grammar of sentences that present our argument while acknowledging that there is an opposing view point. In other words, we will focus on the grammar of concession and counterargument.

Purpose and structure of an argumentative essay

Take a few minutes to refresh your knowledge about the purpose and structure of argumentative / persuasive essays. 

The Purpose of Persuasive Writing

The purpose of persuasion in writing is to convince, motivate, or move readers toward a certain point of view, or opinion. The act of trying to persuade automatically implies more than one opinion on the subject can be argued.

The idea of an argument often conjures up images of two people yelling and screaming in anger. In writing, however, an argument is very different. An argument is a reasoned opinion supported and explained by evidence. To argue in writing is to advance knowledge and ideas in a positive way. Written arguments often fail when they employ ranting rather than reasoning.

Most of us feel inclined to try to win the arguments we engage in. On some level, we all want to be right, and we want others to see the error of their ways. More times than not, however, arguments in which both sides try to win end up producing losers all around. The more productive approach is to persuade your audience to consider your opinion as a valid one, not simply the right one.

The Structure of a Persuasive Essay

The following five features make up the structure of a persuasive essay:

• Introduction and thesis
• Opposing and qualifying ideas
• Strong evidence in support of claim
• Style and tone of language
• A compelling conclusion                                                                                                            

Creating an Introduction and a thesis

The persuasive essay begins with an engaging introduction that presents the general topic. The thesis typically appears somewhere in the introduction and states the writer’s point of view.

Avoid forming a thesis based on a negative claim. For example, “The hourly minimum wage is not high enough for the average worker to live on.” This is probably a true statement, but persuasive arguments should make a positive case. That is, the thesis statement should focus on how the hourly minimum wage is low or insufficient.

Acknowledging Opposing Ideas and Limits to Your Argument

Because an argument implies differing points of view on the subject, you must be sure to acknowledge those opposing ideas. Avoiding ideas that conflict with your own gives the reader the impression that you may be uncertain, fearful, or unaware of opposing ideas. Thus it is essential that you not only address counterarguments but also do so respectfully.

Try to address opposing arguments earlier rather than later in your essay. Rhetorically speaking, ordering your positive arguments last allows you to better address ideas that conflict with your own, so you can spend the rest of the essay countering those arguments. This way, you leave your reader thinking about your argument rather than someone else’s. You have the last word.

Acknowledging points of view different from your own also has the effect of fostering more credibility between you and the audience. They know from the outset that you are aware of opposing ideas and that you are not afraid to give them space.

It is also helpful to establish the limits of your argument and what you are trying to accomplish. In effect, you are conceding early on that your argument is not the ultimate authority on a given topic. Such humility can go a long way toward earning credibility and trust with an audience. Audience members will know from the beginning that you are a reasonable writer, and audience members will trust your argument as a result. For example, in the following concessionary statement, the writer advocates for stricter gun control laws, but she admits it will not solve all of our problems with crime:

Although tougher gun control laws are a powerful first step in decreasing violence in our streets, such legislation alone cannot end these problems since guns are not the only problem we face.

Such a concession will be welcome by those who might disagree with this writer’s argument in the first place. To effectively persuade their readers, writers need to be modest in their goals and humble in their approach to get readers to listen to the ideas.

Text above adapted from: Writing for Success – Open Textbook (umn.edu)    Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Argument, Concession/Acknowledgment and Refutation

We have already seen that as a writer of an argumentative essay, you do not just want to present your arguments for or against a certain issue. You need to convince or persuade your readers that your opinion is the valid one. You convince readers by presenting your points of view, by presenting points of view that oppose yours, and by showing why the points of view different from yours are not as valid as yours.  These three elements of an argumentative essay are known as argument (your point of view), concession/acknowledgement/counterargument (admission that there is an opposing point of view to yours) and refutation (showing why the counterargument is not valid). Acknowledging points of view different from yours and refuting them makes your own argument stronger. It shows that you have thought about all the sides of the issue instead of thinking only about your own views.

Identifying argument, counterargument, concession and refutation

We will now look at sentences from paragraphs which are part of an argumentative essay and identify these parts. Read the four sentences in each group and decide if each sentence is the argument, the counterargument, the acknowledgement / concession or the refutation. Circle your choice.

Schools need to replace paper books with e-books.

argument                counterargument       acknowledgement      refutation

Others believe students will get bad eyesight if they read computer screens instead of paper books.

There is some truth to this statement.

However, e-books are much cheaper than paper books.

The best way to learn a foreign language is to visit a foreign country.

Some think watching movies in the foreign language is the best way to learn a language.

Even though people will learn some of the foreign language this way,

it cannot be better than actually living in the country and speaking with the people every day.

Exercise above adapted from: More Practice Recognizing Counterarguments, Acknowledgements, and Refutations. Clyde Hindman.  Canvas Commons. Public domain.

More Practice Recognizing Counterarguments, Acknowledgements, and Refutations | Canvas Commons (instructure.com)

Sentence structure: Argument and Concession 

Read the following sentences about the issue of cell phone use in college classrooms. Notice the connectors used between the independent and the dependent clauses.

Although cell phones are convenient, they isolate people.

    dependent clause                                              independent clause

 Cell phones isolate people, even though they are convenient.

                independent clause                                      dependent clause

In the sentences above, the argument is “cell phones isolate people”.  The counterargument is “cell phones are convenient” and the acknowledgment/concession is expressed by the use of although / even though to make the concession of the opposing argument. 

In addition, and most importantly, notice the following:

Which clause contains the writer’s argument? Which clause contains the concession?

The writer’s position is contained in the independent clause and the concession is contained in the dependent clause. This helps the writer to highlight their argument by putting it in the clause that stands on its own and leaving the dependent clause for the concession.

Notice that it doesn’t matter if the independent clause is at the beginning or at the end of the sentence.  In both cases, the argument is “cell phones isolate people.”

Notice the difference between these two sentences:

Cell phones are convenient, even though they isolate people.

     independent clause                   dependent clause

Cell phones isolate people, even though they are convenient.

          independent clause                   dependent clause

This pair of sentences shows how the structure of the sentence reflects the point of view of the writer. The argument in the first sentence is that cell phones are convenient. The writer feels this is the important aspect, and thus places it in the independent clause. In the dependent clause, the writer concedes that cell phones isolate people. In contrast, in the second sentence the argument is that cell phones isolate people. The writer feels this is the important aspect and therefore puts this idea in the independent clause. The writer of this sentence concedes that cell phones are convenient, and this concession appears in the dependent clause.

Read the following pairs of sentences and say which sentence in the pair has a positive attitude towards technology in our lives.

                                                             A

• Although technology has brought unexpected problems to society, it has become an instrument of progress.
• Technology has brought unexpected problems to society, even though it has become an instrument of progress.

                                                                  B

• Technology is an instrument of social change, even though there are affordability issues.
• There are affordability issues with technology, even though it is it is an instrument of social change.

Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

Maria Antonini de Pino – Evergreen Valley College, San Jose, California, USA

LIST OF SOURCES (in order of appearance)

• Text adapted from: Writing for Success – Open Textbook (umn.edu)

         Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International

• Exercise adapted from: More Practice Recognizing Counterarguments, Acknowledgements, and Refutations. Clyde Hindman.  Canvas Commons. Public domain.

Learning Materials

• Business Studies
• Combined Science
• Computer Science
• Engineering
• English Literature
• Environmental Science
• Human Geography
• Macroeconomics
• Microeconomics

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 .

Millions of flashcards designed to help you ace your studies

• Cell Biology

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. 

Refutation by _________ occurs when the writer or speaker points out that the opposing argument is not as central to the issue as their opponent thought.

Which step in the process of refutation identifies the claim you are answering ("They say...")?

Which step in the process of refutation explains the importance of your argument ("Therefore...)?

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

Review generated flashcards

to start learning or create your own AI flashcards

Start learning or create your own AI flashcards

• 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
• Cohesive Devices
• Complex Rhetorical Modes
• Compound Complex Sentences
• Concessions
• Concrete Adjectives
• Concrete Nouns
• Consistent Voice
• Counter Argument
• Debate tactics
• Definition by Negation
• Description
• Description Rhetorical Mode
• Direct Discourse
• Equivocation
• Evaluative writing
• Exemplification
• 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
• Literal vs. Nonliteral
• 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
• Polysyndeton
• 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 10

minimization

Learn with 10 Refutation flashcards in the free StudySmarter 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 StudySmarter App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!

Keep learning, you are doing great.

Discover learning materials with the free StudySmarter app

About StudySmarter

StudySmarter 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.

StudySmarter Editorial Team

Team English Teachers

• 9 minutes reading time
• Checked by StudySmarter 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 StudySmarter.

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

Join over 22 million students in learning with our StudySmarter 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

A refutation is the part of the argument that tries to prove that the alternative point of view is false.

Refutations are common parts of formal and informal arguments. This means that they appear in debates, everyday conversations between friends and family members, and in academic settings. In more formal settings, refutations have to fit the standards of the debate/argument. For example, one has to have genuine evidence to back up their refutation and deliver it in a professional way. This is certainly the case in a courtroom or during an official debate. In an informal setting , such as an argument over the dinner table, factual evidence can be lacking as there are no standards or rules around the conversation .  

Explore Refutation

• 1 Definition of Refutation 
• 2 Examples of Refutations in Literature 
• 3 Why Do Writers Use Refutations? 
• 4 Related Literary Terms 
• 5 Other Resources 

Definition of Refutation  

A refutation is a contradictory response to an argument. They occur within all types of arguments and in all settings. There are several different types of refutations, related to the use of logic, evidence, emotional appeals, and more. It might be more or less appreciate to use a specific type of refutation in an argument. Those participating should either be aware of rules or be able to interpret what kind of refutation is appropriate. In literature, refutations usually take place in scripted courtroom scenes or in high-stakes debates between characters.  

Examples of Refutations in Literature  

The merchant of venice by william shakespeare  .

This play is one of the best examples of refutations in all of Shakespeare’s work. In a famous scene, the character Portia dresses herself up as a male lawyer and does her best to try to defend her side of an important argument. She tries to argue that despite agree to give her father, Shylock, a pound of flesh, Antonio should not have his blood spilled. It all depends on one’s interpretation of what “a pound of flesh” means. She takes the initiative to save Antonio’s life and is successful. Here are a few of the best-known lines from this monologue:  

The quality of mercy is not strained; It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest; It blesseth him that gives and him that takes: ‘T is mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes The throned monarch better than his crown: His sceptre shows the force of temporal power, The attribute to awe and majesty, Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings; But mercy is above this sceptred sway;

These are the first ten lines of the longer monologue known by its first line, ‘ The quality of mercy is not strained .’ Throughout this speech , Portia does her best to convince him that mercy is a quality essential to all of humankind and that giving forgiveness is something to be proud of. It is not a weakness and shouldn’t have limits.  

Explore William Shakespeare’s poetry .

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

To Kill a Mockingbird has one of the most famous courtroom scenes in all English-language literature. The main character’s father, Atticus argues on behalf of Tom Robinson, who he knows is innocent, but the world is ready to condemn. He is accused of attacking a woman, a crime that is highlighted by the fact that Robinson is black and the woman is white. Here is a bit of the text from that passage:

[…] We don’t know, but there 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.

Here, Atticus reveals to the jury that Tom couldn’t have committed the crime he was accused of because he’s right-handed while the attacker is left-handed. Atticus uses a great example of logos , or logic, in this refutation.

Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr.  

This famous letter, penned by King, was in Birmingham Jail in Alabama. He responds to a clergyman’s suggestion that he call off civil rights protests. In response, he wrote the following:  

You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.

King goes on to say that there are “four basic steps” in a nonviolent campaign. Listing these, he emphasizes the fact that he and those who are a part of his movement have only had to turn to demonstrations because the community has been unwilling to “engage in good faith negotiations” or solve “bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham.”  

Why Do Writers Use Refutations?  

Writers use refutations when they need to speak out against an opinion or suggestion they don’t believe in. They can be written in regard to real-life issues, such as in the form of King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, or they might be incorporated into fictional scenarios. To Kill a Mockingbird is a wonderful example of the latter. They are an important part of the process of having a debate or argument as both sides are heard out.

Related Literary Terms  

• Argument : a piece of literature is a statement towards the beginning of a work that declares what it’s going to be about.
• Bandwagon : a persuasive style of writing that is used to convince readers of an argument or make them understand a certain perspective .
• Characterization : a literary device that is used to detail and explains the aspects of a specifically crafted character in a novel , play, or poem.
• Conflict : a  plot  device used by writers when two opposing sides come up against each other.
• Ad Hominem : an attack that uses irrelevant information in an attempt to discredit someone’s opinion or argument.

Other Resources  

• Watch:  The Ad Hominem Fallacy
• Listen:  What is an Ad Hominem Attack?
• Watch: Debate Lesson: Refutation and Rebuttal

Home » Literary Device » Refutation

The Definitive Literary Glossary Crafted by Experts

All terms defined are created by a team of talented literary experts, to provide an in-depth look into literary terms and poetry, like no other.

Cite This Page

Baldwin, Emma. "Refutation". Poem Analysis , https://poemanalysis.com/literary-device/refutation/ . Accessed 4 September 2024.

Help Center

Request an Analysis

(not a member? Join now)

Poem PDF Guides

PDF Learning Library

Beyond the Verse Podcast

Poetry Archives

Poetry Explained

Poet Biographies

Useful Links

Poem Explorer

Poem Generator

[email protected]

Poem Solutions Limited, International House, 36-38 Cornhill, London, EC3V 3NG, United Kingdom

• India Today
• Business Today
• Harper's Bazaar
• Brides Today
• Cosmopolitan
• India Today Hindi
• Reader’s Digest
• Aaj Tak Campus

Download App

A day in a teacher's life: A journey of purpose, passion, and growth

An educator's life is a fulfilling blend of purpose and passion, driven by the desire to shape young minds. each day is a journey of growth, continuous learning, and meaningful impact..

Listen to Story

A teacher does not choose his destiny; destiny chooses him. The path to education is often more about divine design than meticulous planning. It's a calling that resonates with a select few, and those who find their place in its fold discover a world filled with wonder, joy, and purposeful striving. When one imagines the life of an educator, it's essential to recognise the magic present even in the mundane. Each day is a bloom of possibilities and purpose.

As Director of The Vivekalaya Group of Institutions, Aishwarya Rao exemplifies the purposeful and passionate journey of an educator, shaping both students and faculty. Her leadership blends strategic planning, curriculum development, and continuous growth.

Let me share a little insight into my life as an educator:

Lighting a lamp symbolises the warding off of evil and the invitation of divine light into our lives

The school morning is a blend of meetings, planning, and budgeting

Our calendars are a balanced mix of academic and extracurricular activities.

In a country like India, where development defines our future, it is imperative to continually improve school curricula to cater to the fast-approaching future

Most days involve organising talks, interactive sessions, or cultural experiences for students

5. Infrastructure and environment

Part of the life of a managing educator includes overseeing construction, expansion, and improvement of the spaces where our children grow and learn.

A common question I often encounter is, "You must hate reading, having to continuously read in school?" Fortunately, the opposite is true. Books line my walls and fill my soul

While learning is a limitless ocean and education a rewarding field, I can only express my gratitude for this path that has chosen me.