Which Sentence Is a Concession (Agreement) for the Opposing View

In argumentative oral and written expression, the speaker or writer makes an argument supported by assertions or evidence. Sometimes the author or speaker also includes a concession recognizing the opposite view. By making a concession to the adversary, the speaker or writer lets readers know that he has considered and understands the other side of the argument. This reinforces the overall argument. Such a concession is welcomed by those who strongly disagree with this author`s argument. To effectively convince their readers, writers must be humble in their goals and humble in their approach to getting readers to listen to ideas. Some transitional words and phrases help orient the reader in the order of a story. Some of these sentences are listed here: the strongest arguments are those that carefully examine all perspectives to find the most reasonable view of the subject. Your readers will deeply appreciate your efforts because they respect both the seriousness of your mission and the readers themselves. Have fun with the process! Here, we would use the points we have made throughout the argument to appeal to our opposition and find productive common ground that benefits both sides. We recognize that some speakers do not want digital technologies to be present in the classroom because they believe they divert attention during lectures. However, we would argue that these technologies can indeed be productive tools for learning – in some cases, they can even be a virtual prerequisite for learning.

We could then propose a solution: that these digital technologies be set aside during the course parts of a lesson, except in the case of students with documented disabilities. This way, students are likely to pay attention and take notes by hand that they can transcribe later if they wish. However, once a class moves from one lecture to another (whether group or individual), students should be able to access these technologies to engage more effectively in the activity, organize their thoughts, and access information. Now that the teacher no longer gives classes, it should be easier to monitor student progress and engagement, and using technology for these activities will lead to more developed and organized outcomes for students. A concession (kuhn-SEH-shun) in literature is a point that gives way to an opposing perspective during a dispute. It allows an author to recognize that the information provided by an adversary has a certain validity and must be taken into account. The word concession comes from the Latin concedere, which means “to yield”. Take a look at the following statements. In the first example, you will receive the objection. The goal is to be able to structure the objection into a concession, and once you`ve done so, your next step is to reasonably counter it.

You have been given an example to begin with. Their goal in terms of structure is to follow this model: here we would introduce the opposite position that digital technology should not be allowed in written lessons. We would also list and discuss their objections to the proposal of technology in the classroom. These could include notions that it distracts the individual, the class, and the teacher, and is often used to avoid class and instead play games or go on social media. This is called a concession. They admit that the counter-argument is not entirely wrong. Of course, you will explain in more detail why this counter-argument is inconclusive, but if you introduce it, you will show that you understand the logical and rational basis of the argument. In this second scenario, you get your affirmation. It`s a little more difficult, but the goal here is to make a reasonable concession and then use the objection to structure a concession and pretend to structure a reasonable counterattack. You`ve been given an example to begin with: you`ll want to present counter-arguments to your thesis in a way that respects those who disagree. This includes researching to find thought leaders on the other side of your topic, present their arguments in an honest light, and then move on to a respectful rebuttal.

Example of a set of concessions. This concession has had important consequences. Genoa decided to oppose the concession and war broke out. But even this concession did not satisfy them; they dethroned Selim and proclaimed his nephew Mustafa. Make it clear that you are presenting someone else`s point of view, but do not use emotionally charged, biased, or polemical language to summarize it. Don`t dismiss your opposition out of hand with language like this: “John Smith naively argues. Instead, you could say, “John Smith claims,” and then summarize John Smith`s point of view. You can explain exactly why Smith`s opinion is naïve – but be sure to try first. Here are some examples of neutral verbs that you can use to introduce another author`s opposing point of view: “affirms,” “argues,” “suggests,” “admits,” “affirms,” “believes.” The Rogerian argument (or Rogerian rhetoric) is a form of argumentative reasoning that aims to create common ground between parties with opposing views or ends. Developed by psychotherapist Carl Rogers and adapted to the rhetoric of researchers Young, Becker and Pike, the speaker seeks a compromise and recognizes the positive aspects of each party`s reasoning in order to arrive at a mutually beneficial solution to a problem. Try to address opposing arguments as early as possible in your essay. Rhetorically speaking, it allows you to sort through your positive arguments last, to better address ideas that conflict with yours, so you can spend the rest of the essay countering those arguments.

This way, you let your reader think about your argument and not someone else`s. You have the last word. 1a: the act or case of concessions (such as granting something as a right, accepting something as true, or admitting defeat) The union will seek further concessions before accepting the contract. There are many valid ways to introduce an opposing point of view, but try to present them in a neutral way before shooting them down. The more your readers believe that you are fair to your opponents, the more likely they are to be open to your rebuttal. Using concessions, the author has established that everyone has civil liberties, but argues that no one has the right to harm the health of another person, regardless of the case. Critical and urgent care abroad is always treated urgently, much like in the United States. However, the main difference is the cost.

Even those with health insurance are not immune to the cost of health care in the United States. Every day, an American acquires some form of cancer, and the only effective treatment could be considered “experimental” by an insurance company and is therefore not covered. Without medical care, the patient must pay for the treatment out of his own pocket. However, these costs can be so prohibitive that the patient opts for a less effective but covered treatment. do not opt for any treatment; or try to pay the cost of treatment and suffer unimaginable financial consequences. Medical bills can easily reach hundreds of thousands of dollars in these cases, which is enough to drive even wealthy families out of their homes and go into perpetual debt. Even though all Americans may one day face this unfortunate situation, many still choose to take the financial risk. Instead of playing with health and financial well-being, U.S. citizens should push their representatives to establish universal health coverage where their coverage is guaranteed and affordable. Present the point of view accurately and fairly, and perhaps admit that this perspective is justified or justified. For example: “Opponents of the Animal Welfare Act have argued that the use of animal persons in drug testing is absolutely necessary to save human lives.” It`s also helpful to set the boundaries of your argument and what you`re trying to achieve.

In fact, you admit very early on that your argument is not the ultimate authority on a particular subject. Such humility can go a long way in gaining credibility and trust with the public. Viewers will know from the get-go that you are a reasonable writer, and viewers will trust your argument. .