Question

What are the two ways to rebut this argument: "Smile: After all, it takes only 43 muscles to frown but only 17 muscles to smile." (Just understand)

A) Provide evidence that smiling actually uses more muscles.
B) Argue that the number of muscles used is not a valid reason to smile.
C) Agree with the argument and offer additional reasons to smile.
D) Ignore the argument as it is not worth rebutting

Answer 1

Two ways to rebut the argument are to provide evidence that smiling actually uses more muscles and to argue that the number of muscles used is not a valid reason to smile.

Step-by-step explanation:

1. Evidence that smiling uses more muscles: You can argue that the act of smiling involves the activation of multiple muscles in the face. While the argument claims that it takes only 17 muscles to smile, you can counter with the fact that different types of smiles can engage a greater number of muscles. For example, a genuine smile involves the activation of not only the muscles around the mouth but also the muscles around the eyes, resulting in a more comprehensive muscle engagement.
2. Invalidity of number of muscles as a reason to smile: You can argue that the number of muscles used is not a valid reason to smile. Smiling is not solely determined by the number of muscles involved but rather by the emotion or intention behind it. The act of smiling is often associated with positive emotions, such as happiness or amusement, which can provide valid reasons to smile regardless of the number of muscles used.