Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea.Write a res

When studying for a test or preparing for a presentation, it is a popular notion that teaching someone else who does not have much expertise on the concepts of your exam or ideas you are presenting will further your own grasp of the information. This idea can be translated to arguments as well. While some may argue that the validity of an argument does not depend on contrasting viewpoints, it is clear that by having to prove ones argument over an opposing assertion, in fact, strengthens the very argument. I believe that the strongest test of an argument does rely on its ability to persuade someone who disagrees because the arguer discovers the worth of their own statements by defending it against opposing views.

In the process of convincing someone with a contradicting argument, one digs deep into the benefits of one's own viewpoint. For example, three friends are involved are involved in a conversation. Friend C is debating on whether to have a baby and raise a family. Friend A opposes the idea and friend B is vouching for the decision to have a child. If friend B is trying to convince friend A to agree with his or her point of view, they will most likely be forced to analyze the benefits of their idea and why friend C should consider their reasoning to ultimately make reach a conclusion. Friend B can claim that the joy a child brings to a family is unparalleled, a parent will be able to produce a human being that is a result of at least a part of their genes, and a person who has the potential to be successful and make a difference in the world can attribute their achievements to the raising and care given to them by their parents. By elucidating these benefits, friend B themselves seems to present a solid argument in favor of having a baby. This ability to convince another person who initially opposes the statements made is a significant factor of how valid the premise of an argument is.

Additionally, by pointing out the weaknesses that the opposing argument contains lends value to the arguer and their idea. Going back to the baby example, if friend A asserts that a baby's crying is troublesome and irritating, friend B can justify that by stating that they are just perhaps hungry. If friend A argues that babies can break things and mess up the house, friend B can state that if the parent is careful with their belongings, such disasters or accidents will not occur. Another situation to look at would be driving on icy roads. If friend A is against driving on icy roads and wants to explicate to friend B that it is not advisable may point out the flaws of taking the car out when there is sleet outside. For example, friend A may state that a greater proportion of accidents occur when there is ice outside, especially on highways and interstate roads. Friend A may also claim that friend B's reasoning is unsound because the car's engine and wheels would be compromised when driving in such terrible weather conditions. Therefore, by investigating the deficiencies in the opposing argument, one can discover the worth that their own idea holds.

By assessing both the benefits of one's own argument and by diving into the flaws of the rival argument, a person is able to test the validity of their own argument and come upon the value that their assertion holds. It is evident from real-life and mundane examples that these reasons provide sound justification and further strength to the argument in question.