0
The argument is that children go to school to learn not to teach their elders , where teachers can be included. Public schools are subsidised with taxes. Bearing this in mind, we may say that taxpayers send their children to school for them to learn not to teach. This was what the taxpayers did when they themselves were students . Therefore, taxpayers send their children to school on the premise that, at their age, they needed to learn, not teach is the reasoning of the argument.
What else can I help you with?
What is the reasoning in this argument The original idea of schools which i do not believe is yet abandoned as worthless or out of date was that children had not yet reached the point of experience?
The argument is likely suggesting that the original purpose of schools was to educate children who lacked life experience. This idea may still hold value as children continue to require guidance and education to develop their understanding of the world. However, the argument may also imply that modern schools may need to adapt to better cater to the needs of children in today's society.
What ia an argument that makes an opposing point to another argument?
One argument that opposes another could present evidence or reasoning that challenges the validity of the original points. It may offer a different perspective, counterexamples, or alternative interpretations to show flaws in the original argument. By presenting contrasting evidence or logic, the opposing argument aims to undermine the original position.
What the opposite of thesis?
The opposite of a thesis is an antithesis, which presents a contrasting viewpoint or argument to the original thesis. It is often used in dialectical reasoning to challenge or counter the main argument.
What is a verbal or oral response to an argument presenting an opposite viewpoint?
A counterargument would be a verbal or oral response to an argument presenting an opposite viewpoint. It aims to challenge or dispute the original argument by offering differing evidence or reasoning.
What a verbal or oral response to an argument presenting an opposite viewpoint.?
A rebuttal to an argument presenting an opposite viewpoint would involve offering counterpoints that challenge the logic or evidence of the original argument. It aims to weaken the opposing argument and strengthen one's own position. Effective rebuttals often address specific claims or holes in the opponent's reasoning.
What group contended that the original republican party had abandoned their original principles?
Federalists
What is a counterclaim in an argumentative?
A statement that weakens the main point of the author's writing.
How do you write a rebuttal paragraph?
To write a rebuttal paragraph, first clearly state the opposing argument you wish to counter. Then, provide evidence or reasoning that challenges this viewpoint, highlighting any flaws or gaps in the opposing argument. Conclude by reinforcing your original position, demonstrating why your argument remains stronger despite the counterpoint. Ensure that your rebuttal is respectful and well-structured to maintain credibility.
What are counterarguments and refutation?
Counterarguments are opposing viewpoints or arguments that challenge a given perspective or claim. Refutation involves directly addressing these counterarguments by providing evidence, reasoning, or explanations that undermine or disprove them, strengthening the original argument in the process. It helps demonstrate the validity and persuasiveness of the initial argument by acknowledging and responding to potential objections.
Is a characteristic of a strong counterclaim?
A strong counterclaim presents a clear and logical argument that directly challenges the main claim, supported by credible evidence and reasoning. It addresses potential weaknesses in the original argument and acknowledges opposing viewpoints while providing a rebuttal. Additionally, a strong counterclaim is relevant and well-structured, making it easy for the audience to understand and consider.
What is over proving?
Over proving refers to the act of excessively validating or justifying a claim, argument, or position beyond what is necessary or reasonable. This can lead to unnecessary complexity and can weaken the original assertion by introducing irrelevant information or overly elaborate reasoning. In discussions or debates, over proving can distract from the main point and may cause the audience to question the credibility of the argument being made.
When passing an argument by reference the module can modify the argument in the calling part of the program?
Yes, when passing an argument by reference, changes to the argument made within the module will directly affect the original variable in the calling part of the program. This is because the reference to the original variable's memory address is passed to the module, allowing it to modify the variable directly.
