Rebuttal Outline

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 711
  • Published : March 20, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
REBUTTAL FORM OF PERSUASION

The purpose of this paper is to argue against those perpetrators who are committing human rights violations against an oppressed group of people who are unable to defend themselves against the abuses. To defend the victims, you must know why and how the perpetrators are oppressing the group of victims and why these abuses are wrong.

Your paper will be organized according to the rebuttal format for persuasion. This paper is organized the same way your persuasive paper last year was organized. Make sure you follow the form below for this paper. This format is required; it is not an option. Even though there are many forms of persuasion, we are learning the rebuttal format.

I.Introduction
a.Tell why the issue is important.
i.Harm—What or whom does it harm? Identify the victims.
ii.Significance—To what extent are the victims being harmed? 1.Quantity—List statistics indicating the number of cases in which harm can be found and the duration of the harm. 2.Quality—Cite individual examples showing the intensity at which harm occurs. iii.Inherency—Show how the current system of laws or government involvement are promoting the problem or prohibiting its removal. b.Background information—Give a short history of the issue. c.Defining value terms—Define controversial or vague terms. Include various possible definitions where necessary. (For example, you may want to distinguish between your definition of adult and that of those who use child soldiers to fight their wars.) d.State your position on the issue. (thesis)

II.Body
a.Rebuttal
i.Explain an important argument against your position.
ii.Refute this argument against your position by offering evidence to support your rebuttal. 1.facts to show proof by induction
2.syllogisms for deduction
3.examples
4.reasons
5.quotes
iii.Explain a second argument against your position.
iv.Refute it in the same way as above.
v.Explain a third argument against...
tracking img