Main Answer:
The speaker should choose option (b) by refuting the counterclaim with reasons and evidence. This approach ensures a thorough engagement with opposing views, fostering a more comprehensive and convincing argument.
Step-by-step explanation:
In a discussion, addressing a counterclaim requires a strategic approach. The speaker should choose option (b) by refuting the counterclaim with reasons and evidence. This approach ensures a thorough engagement with opposing views, fostering a more comprehensive and convincing argument.
When a speaker acknowledges a counterclaim (a), it sets the stage for a more respectful and open discussion. However, simply acknowledging its existence may not be sufficient for a robust argument. On the other hand, refuting the counterclaim with reasons and evidence (b) demonstrates the speaker's commitment to providing a well-supported stance. This not only strengthens the speaker's position but also adds credibility to their argument.
Giving an opinion on why the counterclaim is incorrect (c) may introduce bias and subjective perspectives into the discussion, potentially weakening the overall argument. Ignoring the counterclaim to keep attention on the claim (d) undermines the principles of a well-rounded and fair discussion. Therefore, refuting the counterclaim with reasons and evidence strikes a balance between acknowledging opposing views and providing a compelling case.
In conclusion, addressing a counterclaim in a discussion requires a thoughtful approach that involves countering it with reasons and evidence. This method ensures a more persuasive and informed dialogue, promoting a deeper understanding of the topic at hand.
Therefore, the correct answer is b) by refuting the counterclaim with reasons and evidence.