OBJECTION

Like refutations, objections are reactive, non-preferred second-turn interventions, that oppose the conclusions of the first turn, the target discourse.

In terms of content, objections can be considered politely toned down refutations, that may still have the full force of a refutation. Presenting a refutation as an objection is a small price for logic to pay in the name of civility.

However, objections can also be seen as weak, indecisive refutations, that are easily dismissed. To refute is to shoot down, while to object is merely an attempt to stop,  or at best to weaken, the position under scrutiny.

Whether a rebuttal is considered an objection or a refutation depends on the kind of dialogue that develops between the participants. In a logical language game, one cannot claim that all swans are white and simultaneously concede that this particular swan is black. Conclusive counterarguments count as refutations. In ordinary language, however I might argue that in general, swans are white, while conceding the existence of black swans as exotic exceptions.

The same kind of argument can be treated as either a refutation or a concession. For example, as a refutation,  an objection might emphasize a negative consequence of the interlocutor’s proposal:

— But if you build the new school here, the students’ commute will take half an hour longer.

This counter-argument can be contextually constructed as a refutation:

— and this is clearly unacceptable, classes start at 7.30 a.m., and some commuting students  already spend more than an hour commuting. The new school cannot be built here!

or as an objection:

— We’ll have to create a new bus route for commuter students, but this is still the best place to build the new school!

Objection and refutation have essentially different interactional statuses; objections are cooperative, while refutations are antagonistic. The objecting party is a dialectical figure, essential in cooperative everyday argumentative dialogue.

While refutations seek to close the debate, without listening to the answers, objections keep the dialogue open. They correspond to the problematic of the discourse under discussion, which is accepted as a working hypothesis. Objections are framed as a search for better answers. They seek explanations, precisions and modalizations. They accept being only partially answered or integrated as the case may be.

The ethos and emotional states expressed by refutation and objection differ greatly. Refutation wants the last word and is associated with aggression. Objection evokes a spirit of moderation, collaboration and openness.

In a proleptic discourse, referring to possible negative observations, the speaker mentions “objections”, not “refutations”, followed by a but structure:

It could be objected that P [prolepsis], but R [answer to the objection, proposal reinforced]

See refutation; concession; prolepsis.