By the due date assigned, post your reflections on how you addressed Objections and Alternative Views in your researched argumentative essay, following the Assignment Guidelines below.
By the end of the week, respond to at least two of your peers’ posts, following the Peer Response Guidelines below
Assignment Guidelines:
Reflect on the following in a well-developed paragraph:
As you composed your first draft of the essay, did you imagine your audience as sympathetic, hostile, or somewhere in between?
What was the central claim of your essay and what opposing points of view did you present?
How did you attempt to accommodate or refute opposing arguments, and what challenges did you encounter in the process?
Peer Response Guidelines:
Address the following questions as you respond in a well-developed paragraph to two or more of your peers:
Do you agree or disagree with your classmate’s central claim? Are you more inclined to resist or accept your classmate’s position?
How strong are the opposing arguments that your classmate presented? Are there other opposing arguments that should be considered?
How would you refute or accommodate those arguments?
>> Class,
This week’s discussion assignment is designed to help you incorporate opposing and alternative views into your paper, and to refute those views. Here is an example of incorporating such a section (which is also called a concession/ refutation) into your paper. Please note– This is not an example of how to do the discussion assignment, but how to incorporate the opposing/ alternative views into your final draft of the paper.
Incorporating Opposing/ Alternative Views (Concession/ Refutation section)
Remember, the point is to show the opposing side that you understand their argument and can “concede” them their view; this shows you are reasonable and aware of the many sides of the issue. However, you want to “refute” their objection(s), which makes your own argument stronger. Think of it like answering the objections of the other side.
Example Thesis:
While the soda tax was ultimately defeated in Santa Fe, the issue of the need for affordable pre-K programs for all families and children was not put to rest. Since the federal government is not taking responsibility for this issue, cities and states need to. They need to allocate funds themselves to fund these programs, even if it takes creating a special income tax. Citizens need to demand and rally for a prioritization of this issue, which affects the future of our whole society—the children.
Concession/ Refutation section:
Those who voted against the tax on soda had some valid points of objection. They argued that the tax would unfairly target low-income families (who generally consume more soda beverages) and they would effectively end up shouldering the burden of cost for the pre-K programs. They were rightly concerned, especially since there is a huge wealth divide in Santa Fe, and there are many Santa Fe residents who could afford a small tax on particular foods or beverages, while there are many others who cannot. However, these concerns and issues ultimately do not outweigh the benefits of such a tax—especially on what is a nonessential and even health-compromising product. Opponents want to find a better way to raise money; but there will never be a tax that does not anger and outrage certain citizens, who feel they should not have to pay for something that doesn’t affect them directly, or that they don’t feel strongly about. Additional taxes, even for good causes, are usually unpopular. Perhaps there should be proposed a tax that does not apparently single out a certain demographic of the city, or the city needs to find a new way to allocate money for early childhood education programs.
