Planting a Naysayer and Answering the Opposition Planting

Planting a Naysayer and Answering the Opposition

Planting a Naysayer in Your Text Ch. 6 of They Say / I Say • No argument occurs in a vacuum. Everyone comes to most topics with some already formed opinions or ideas in the back of their minds. Your job as a persuasive writer is to anticipate the most common of those ideas and to refute them. • Refute: to prove false or erroneous (mistaken). Prove a person to be in error.

Example of an Answer to the Opposition: • In Chapter 6 of They Say, I Say, the authors use Kim Chernin’s book about women and the pressure to be thin. • Chernin’s claim: The pressure to be thin is harmful to women. • The naysayer/opposition’s argument (p. 80): Losing weight helps her feel better about herself, have more confidence. (So… this pressure to be thin is not so harmful. ) • Chernin’s answer to the opposition (p. 88): A vast percentage of women who lose weight gain it back and then some, making the gain in self-confidence temporary and putting women in a worse position than they were in to begin with. • By including a naysayer (an opposing view) in her argument and answering it, Chernin strengthens her original stance.

Examples of Planting a Naysayer in Readings • Some essays/articles devote entire sections to answering opposition claims because the author knows that the audience may have heard those claims before and needs to deal with them before moving on. • For example, in “TV Diversity: Whose Job Is It Anyway? ” the author includes some common opposition claims that offer reasons for the lack of representation. THEN, after she has brought up the opposition claim, she REFUTES the claim by explaining how the opposition's reasoning is weak.

When Answering an Opposing Argument… • Make sure that the opposing argument is actually an opinion that a reasonable person might have, or that you have seen often in debates about this subject. Making up a ridiculous or outlandish claim that is not being put forward by anyone who opposes you just to knock it down is called a “straw man” argument, this is a logical fallacy, and it makes your argument look weak. • Be fair. Summarize the opposing argument in a way that someone who holds it would recognize and agree with. • Avoid making judgments about the character or emotional state of people who hold the opposing opinion. • Make sure that your answer (refutation) of the opposing argument is strong and relevant. (Don’t just dismiss the opposing argument with “that doesn’t matter. )

Planting a Naysayer, Cont. • Remember, the purpose of planting a Naysayer in your essay is to show that you are aware of the other side’s argument, aware that not everyone is going to agree with you immediately, and that you have an answer for those arguments or objections. • This means that you need to make sure that your argument is stronger for having included the naysayer because you have answered the opposition.

Group Work With “TV Can Be a Good Parent” on p. 454 • We are going to divide into groups based on whether we agree or disagree with Ariel Gore’s assertion that parents who let their young children watch television are not necessarily bad parents, and the guidelines put out by the American Academy of Pediatrics strongly discouraging TV watching are too simplistic.

Group Work: Counterarguments • Now that we have divided into those who agree and those who don’t, each side is going to come up with three counterarguments to your position. • Use the “TV Can Be a Good Parent” essay to inspire discussion. If you agree with Gore, what are some reasonable problems people might have with her ideas? If you disagree with Gore, what are some of her arguments that disagree with your stance?

Group Work: Refuting the Counterargument • Now that we have a list of counterarguments on each side of the debate, work with your group to refute three counterarguments. These may be the original three your group came up with, or they may be other counterarguments from the class list. • Remember to specifically address the concerns of a hypothetical reader holding the view that opposes yours.

Answering the Opposition in Essay #2 • Have you run across any articles/opinions about your claim that differ from yours? • How might you answer those differing opinions? Do you have good reasons that you agree with one point of view and not the other? • Are there places in your essay where your argument would be strengthened by inserting a naysayer into your text and then answering the naysayer’s points? • If you have already included a naysayer in your essay, reread that section and make necessary changes. • If you have not already included a naysayer, write a brief paragraph where you do so using the source I asked you to bring with you for today.

Planting a Naysayer Practice: Part 1 • For this first exercise, I want you to think about a strong opinion you have on a topic that interests you. – For the best results, choose an opinion whose opposition is familiar to you. – Choose an opinion about which there is considerable debate. – Your opinion might be about sports, television, makeup, cars, politics, current events, makeup, films… it doesn’t matter what the topic is. What matters is that you UNDERSTAND why you think what you think and that you UNDERSTAND the reasons people disagree.

Planting a Naysayer Practice: Part 1 • Write a paragraph or two where you do these things: • Give your readers CONTEXT for the argument you are about to dive into. Briefly introduce the topic and give your readers any relevant information they will need to understand the naysayer and your response. • SUMMARIZE OR QUOTE the opinions of those who disagree with you FAIRLY and THOROUGHLY. • RESPOND to the opposing points you have just summarized or quoted in such a way that your opposition is discredited and YOUR claim is strengthened. – Explain why the reader should side with YOU and not with your opposition. Poke holes in the naysayer’s logic, point out inconsistencies in his or her thinking, etc.

Peer Response to Naysayer Practice • Can you identify the claim? • Is the naysayers position fairly, rationally explained? Or is the naysayer a “straw man”? • Is the response to the naysayer strong? Is the claim stronger for having included the naysayer?