Other Common Rebuttal Strategies

Here are some other strategies you can use to respond to arguments, besides tearing down their logic and using your case. They are not ranked in order of what is most effective. Effectiveness differs depending on the arguments made, rather than some sort of flowchart.

Learning common rebuttal strategies will also ensure your arguments are logically stronger.

• Problem Solution Mismatch
• Wrong in Principle
• Generalization
• Causes more Harm than Good
• Not their Role
• Not Practical
• Contradiction
• Strategic Concession

A) Problem Solution Mismatch

You can agree there is a problem, but that this solution doesn’t solve the problem or the cause of the problem is different from that they’ve identified, and thus the solution doesn’t cause the problem. For example, Argument: Korean education is over competitive and doesn’t develop creative thinking skills. Co-ed schools help ensure more interaction between different genders and can solve this problem. (The problem identified is competitiveness and lack of creative thinking, but the interaction between genders doesn’t solve this problem, at least not as explained in this argument.)

B) Wrong in Principle

The argument contradicts a basic principle that society acknowledges is right (i.e, saving lives). You will need to explain why upholding that principle is more important than whatever gain the argument achieves. For example, Argument: Keeping a murderer in prison for life will cost many millions of dollars. Sentencing murderers to death saves the state money which can then be used to help society. (The state must always preserve life and life is always more important than money. Even if that money can be used to help other people, the state cannot justify killing one person to help others.)

C) Generalization

This means your opponents are assuming every situation is the same because of one example or one small sample. To be more effective, you should try to show why this situation is different. For example, Argument: The US-Mexico FTA lead to exploitation of Mexico, therefore the Korea-US FTA will lead to the same. (this is a generalization. Just because Mexico wasn’t able to take advantage of the FTA with the US doesn’t mean Korea cannot do the same. Korea is in a different position from Mexico and can learn from their mistakes. Korea already has a positive trade balance with the US.)

D) Has the Same or Worse Effect

You can argue that what the argument is trying to achieve does not happen or instead it becomes worse under the contentions put forth by your opponents. For example, Argument: Keeping a murderer in prison for life will cost many millions of dollars. Sentencing murderers to death saves the state money which can then be used to help society. (The death penalty doesn’t save money, the state has to spend more money on appeals as most prisoners sentences to death spend many years on death row.) For example, Argument: Korea signing an FTA with US will lead to Korea losing competitiveness as our trade balance will drop. (This is not true. Actually NOT signing the FTA will US will lead to a loss of competitiveness.)

E) Not Practical

The argument is not practical - there no money, no willpower, no person to do, no time etc. For example, Argument: To solve the problem of unemployment in Korea, each company should be forced to hire more people. (This is impossible. Companies will not cooperate, and even if the government can force all companies to do this, companies will lose money and will go bankrupt, leading to the same or even worse effect– unemployment.)

F) Not Their Role

Different actors in society have different roles or obligations– just like jobs. These expectations helps society function. Imagine if parents or politicians or firemen or teachers didn’t do the things we expect of them: society would immediately fail. However these roles are not fixed and keep changing. Is it the role of students to just study? How much freedom do parents have to do things to or for their children? Thinking about the roles and duties required of members of society helps often frame contentions as useful/relevant, and can help you discard those that your opponent has created around improper roles. For example, Argument: Schools should require students to wear uniforms because they are there to learn, not play or express themselves. (Schools also develop creativity, discipline, morale and personality of students. That’s why they play games, take arts classes and so on. So the role of schools is not just academic teaching, but overall development.)

G) Contradictions

Often different parts of an argument might contradict each other. Pointing out contradictions is an incredibly effective rebuttal, as it is the worst logical mistake possible. It makes your opponents look incapable and disorganized if they have contradictory points, and effectively allows you to remove two of their contentions at once, if not more. For example, Argument: We should use the death penalty to discourage serial killers. Serial killers are psychopaths who do not care about living or dying. (If serial killers don’t care about dying, why will they be discouraged by the death penalty? In order for someone to be deterred, they need to be rational, if you argue serial killers are not rational, then they will not be deterred.)

While some of these examples are overly simplified and you won’t often see such flagrant transgressions upon basic logic and reasoning, they provide a baseline context upon which you can recognize how and when your opponents might be making a major mistake in their case.

In addition, if you cannot directly rebut an argument, you can concede it AS LONG AS it’s not a major argument to your overall case.

H) Strategic Concession

You concede the argument, but argue that something else is more important. EVEN IF their contention is true, they still don’t win the debate because of (your case’s strongest points here and how they are more important) For example, Argument: An embryo is a form of life, destroying it is killing (We can concede the idea that the embryo is a form of life, but the life of the mother (quality of life) is more important than life that is not yet independent.)