Readers will believe that you are a more thoughtful writer if you acknowledge objections to your argument. But they will also find you trustworthy if you acknowledge alternative claims, reasons, evidence, values, and definitions—things that might complicate your argument, but do not necessarily contradict it. Real-world problems rarely have one solution or approach to reaching a resolution, so readers will always be thinking of alternative ways of looking at your topic. When you acknowledge alternatives and explain how you have chosen to focus or limit your argument, you enhance your credibility by showing that you are aware that your readers may have chosen a different path.

Of course, you cannot acknowledge every alternative. Instead, choose to acknowledge only those alternatives that you can reasonably assume are important to readers.

What to Look For

The following paragraph comes from paper on government incentives for alternative-energy innovations. In the two versions of the following paragraph, the writer claims that hybrid-car technology deserves government investment. Version (A) lays out the reason or claim and introduces supporting evidence.

A) While environmental concerns and tightened government regulations are motivating companies to produce cars that could run off an alternative and renewable energy source, hybrid vehicles are the only types that could be produced at a low enough cost to make the transition possible in the near future. The most efficient 2008 vehicle was a Honda Civic with 74.3 miles per gallon, compared to 48.2 miles per gallon for the top non-hybrid car, a VW Beetle. On a national scale, this 26 mpg improvement in fuel economy would lead to huge oil savings. Given the clear advantages of investing in hybrid technology as the best possibility for reducing car emissions in the next 20 years, there are many steps the government can take to encourage the industry to innovate with hybrid cars . . .

Now, read version (B), which makes the same claim, but also acknowledges alternatives to hybrid technology and explains why this paper will only focus on the hybrid car. Find the writer's responses to these alternatives.

B) Although scientists have dreamed for many years of creating a car that could run off an alternative and renewable energy source, no viable options have yet appeared on the market. Many environmentalists would like to see more investment in solar and battery technology, and both have shown some signs of promise for the future. However, while solar cars have been successful in races, so far a car roof cannot gather enough energy outside of desert climates. By contrast, battery-electric cars are efficient, yet at this point the batteries are too expensive to offer a cost-effective option for alternative-energy automobiles. We might focus on research for cheap mass-produced batteries, but there is no guarantee that the technology will be perfected any time in the near future. While such energy sources may be worth exploring in the long-term, the hybrid car is currently the only vehicle to combine practicality with environmental concerns. The most efficient 2008 vehicle was a Honda Civic with 74.3 miles per gallon, compared to 48.2 miles per gallon for the top non-hybrid car, a VW Beetle. On a national scale, this 26 mpg improvement in fuel economy would lead to huge oil savings. Given the clear advantages of investing in hybrid technology as the best possibility for reducing car emissions in the next 20 years, there are many steps the government can take to encourage the industry to innovate with hybrid cars . . .