Modul4
Module 4 - Argument and counterargument
How to recognise a real argument and respond to different opinions
Introduction
In the previous module, we learned how to draw conclusions. You already know that not every conclusion is correct just because it sounds logical. Now we will learn something else — how to recognise an argument. We will also learn how to respond to a different opinion without attacking it. This is an important part of critical thinking.
What is an argument?
An argument is a reason why we think something. An argument answers the question: "Why do you think that?"
For example:
- "We should have more breaks." → That is an opinion.
- "We should have more breaks because students are tired and concentrate better after resting." → That is an argument.
An argument explains the reason.
What is NOT an argument?
An argument is not:
- an insult,
- an attack on a person,
- a statement without explanation,
- a statement such as "because that's the way it is" or "because that's the way it's always been".
Example:
- "That's nonsense." → That's not an argument.
- "You don't understand." → That's an attack on a person, not an argument.
Counterargument
A counterargument is a different perspective on the same issue. For example:
- Argument: "More breaks will help students."
- Counterargument: "More breaks mean less time for teaching."
Both statements contain a reason. Critical thinking means being able to perceive both sides, both perspectives, and think about them.
Strong and weak arguments
A strong argument:
- is specific,
- has an explanation,
- is based on facts or experience.
A weak argument:
- is vague,
- contains only emotions,
- does not give a clear reason.
How to respond to a different opinion?
You can say, for example:
- "I understand why you think that."
- "I have a different perspective on the matter."
- "Can you explain that further?"
- "I don't know, I need more information."
Critical thinking is not about winning. It's about understanding.
📌 Summary
- The argument is justified.
- The counterargument is justified in a different way.
- An argumentative attack is a foul — it is not an argument.
- It is okay to disagree.
Practical exercises
✍️ Practical exercise 1: Read the text and answer the questions.
Some pupils think that school should start later because they are tired in the morning. Others argue against this, saying that it would be difficult for parents who have to go to work early.
Select the reason given by those who want school to start later:
👀 Show solution
- ❌ Parents go to work.
- ❌ Going to school is pointless.
- ✅ Pupils are tired in the morning.
- ❌ Pupils want to go to work.
Select the reason – counter-argument – given by those who disagree with a later start to the school day:
👀 Show solution
- ❌ Pupils want to go to work.
- ✅ Parents go to work (early).
- ❌ Going to school is pointless.
- ❌ Pupils are tired in the morning.
Does the text contain an argumentative attack?
👀 Show solution
✅ No (correct)
No. Both sentences contain a reason — they are arguments.
✍️ Practical exercise 2: Read the text and answer the questions.
Some people say that exchange programmes in Europe help students gain experience. Others say that exchange programmes are not a good idea because they are too expensive.
Choose the reason given by people who support exchange programmes:
👀 Show solution
- ❌ That they are expensive and so it is good that someone pays for them.
- ✅ They help students gain experience.
- ❌ Students make friends from other countries.
- ❌ They support students in finding work abroad.
What reason do people who criticise them give?
👀 Show solution
- ❌ They don't benefit students; they don't learn anything.
- ❌ They are not suitable for all students.
- ✅ They are too expensive.
- ❌ They encourage students to move abroad for work.
Do both sentences contain a reason; are they an argument and a counter-argument?
👀 Show solution
✅ Yes.
Explanation: Yes. Both sentences contain a reason. Therefore, they are arguments (an argument and a counter-argument). In this exercise, we are not concerned with who is right. We are learning the structure of argumentation.
✍️ Practical exercise 3: Read the text and answer the questions.
Some people say that new cycle paths should be built in the city because this would improve safety for cyclists. Others say that this is unnecessary because only a fool would think that cycle paths are needed when cyclists can ride on the road and drivers are careful.
Based on the text, select the reason given by people who want new cycle paths:
👀 Show solution
- ❌ Transport would be more environmentally friendly.
- ❌ There would be fewer cars and less traffic in the city.
- ❌ People would be healthier because they would get more exercise.
- ✅ It would improve safety for cyclists.
Find the sentence that is not an argument.
👀 Show solution
- ✅ Only a fool would think that cycle paths are necessary.
- ❌ Cyclists can ride on the road.
- ❌ Drivers are careful.
- ❌ New cycle paths should be built in the city.
Is there a sentence in the text that constitutes an argumentative attack?
👀 Show solution
- ❌ No. There is no such sentence containing an argumentative attack.
- ❌ Yes. The sentence "…others say it's pointless…" is an argumentative attack.
- ❌ Yes. The sentence "...I can ride on the road..." is an attack, not an argument.
- ✅ The sentence "…only a stupid person would think…" is an attack on people, not an argument.