LNAT Addressing Counterarguments 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A debater claims: 'Speed cameras reduce accidents.' An opponent responds: 'Drivers just slow down at cameras and speed up after.' What type of counterargument is this?
- A concession that strengthens the original claim
- A rebuttal challenging the effectiveness of the measure (Correct answer)
- A red herring introducing an irrelevant concern
- A straw man misrepresenting the original claim
Correct answer: A rebuttal challenging the effectiveness of the measure
The opponent challenges whether speed cameras actually achieve their stated goal, making it a rebuttal about effectiveness.
Question 2: When an author 'steelmans' a counterargument before refuting it, what is the primary purpose?
- To confuse the reader about which side the author supports
- To present the strongest version of the opposition to make the eventual rebuttal more credible (Correct answer)
- To concede the debate to the opposing side
- To avoid engaging with weak objections
Correct answer: To present the strongest version of the opposition to make the eventual rebuttal more credible
Steelmanning presents the counterargument at its strongest, so defeating it demonstrates the author's position is robust.
Question 3: A passage argues for mandatory voting. A counterargument states: 'Forcing people to vote violates freedom of expression.' Which response best addresses this counterargument?
- Most countries already have mandatory voting, so it cannot be wrong
- Compelled participation in civic processes differs from compelled speech, and blank ballots preserve expressive freedom (Correct answer)
- People who don't vote are lazy and deserve no protection
- Freedom of expression is not an absolute right anyway
Correct answer: Compelled participation in civic processes differs from compelled speech, and blank ballots preserve expressive freedom
This response directly engages the freedom concern by distinguishing civic participation from compelled speech and noting that abstention remains an option.
Question 4: In LNAT passages, a 'tu quoque' counterargument attempts to:
- Provide evidence that directly contradicts the main claim
- Dismiss an argument by pointing out the arguer's own inconsistency or hypocrisy (Correct answer)
- Introduce a new factual consideration the author overlooked
- Strengthen the main argument through analogy
Correct answer: Dismiss an argument by pointing out the arguer's own inconsistency or hypocrisy
Tu quoque ('you too') attacks the arguer's credibility by alleging hypocrisy rather than addressing the argument's logic.
Question 5: An author argues that social media increases political polarization. A counterargument notes: 'Polarization existed long before social media.' How should a strong author respond?
- Abandon the claim since polarization predates social media
- Acknowledge polarization's historical roots while arguing social media uniquely accelerates or deepens it (Correct answer)
- Ignore the counterargument and repeat the original claim
- Argue that historical examples are always irrelevant to modern issues
Correct answer: Acknowledge polarization's historical roots while arguing social media uniquely accelerates or deepens it
Acknowledging the historical point while arguing social media introduces a qualitatively different dynamic is a sophisticated and honest response.
Question 6: Which of the following best describes the rhetorical technique of 'concede and pivot'?
- Accepting a counterargument entirely and changing one's position
- Acknowledging a valid aspect of the counterargument before redirecting to why the main claim still holds (Correct answer)
- Repeating the original argument more forcefully after hearing objections
- Attacking the credibility of the person raising the counterargument
Correct answer: Acknowledging a valid aspect of the counterargument before redirecting to why the main claim still holds
'Concede and pivot' grants limited validity to the opposition before explaining why it does not undermine the core argument.
Question 7: A passage proposes banning single-use plastics. A counterargument argues: 'Alternatives like cotton bags have higher carbon footprints per use.' What makes this a strong counterargument?
- It introduces a completely unrelated environmental issue
- It uses specific evidence to reveal an unintended consequence that complicates the proposal (Correct answer)
- It concedes the main point and is therefore weak
- It is based purely on emotion rather than evidence
Correct answer: It uses specific evidence to reveal an unintended consequence that complicates the proposal
By citing a concrete trade-off — higher carbon costs of alternatives — the counterargument forces the proponent to weigh competing environmental harms.
LNAT Addressing Counterarguments 2
A debater claims: 'Speed cameras reduce accidents.' An opponent responds: 'Drivers just slow down at cameras and speed up after.' What type of counterargument is this?