Anticipating Objections: Strengthening Your Argument Strategy With Prolepsis

Anyone who wants to convince must always be ready to face objections. But wouldn't it be better to anticipate them altogether?

Indeed, counter-arguing requires careful preparation. So wouldn't it be more effective to anticipate objections even before they are formulated, and thus protect our arguments? This rhetorical strategy is called prolepsis.

Prolepsis consists in formulating the interlocutor's objection in his place, in order to respond to it before it can be stated. It is identified by structures such as: "Of course you will tell me that ... but to that I would reply that ...."; "I hear those who think that ... but don't forget that ...".

The main objective is to deprive the interlocutor of the opportunity to contradict us.

We'll be looking at how to use prolepsis with finesse, and in a way that's adapted to each context: monological or competitive.

1. Prolepsis in a monological context

When an audience is listening to you silently, the use of prolepsis isn't just a possibility: it's a must!

Because don't kid yourself: your audience isn't sitting back and passively listening to you talk.

They're analyzing your every argument in their heads. They are potentially contradicting us at every turn, albeit silently.

Ideally, you should be able to anticipate the emergence of objections by presenting your argument so fluidly that it doesn't seem to give rise to any contradiction. Except... that's easier said than done!

Keep in mind that before you've even opened your mouth, your audience will be steeped in other information and arguments heard before on the subject you're about to address. Your audience has most likely already formed an opinion, more or less well-developed.

As a speaker, it is crucial to consider whether the audience might have any objections that could undermine the effectiveness of your argument. If you believe they do, it's imperative to employ a prolepsis, addressing these objections preemptively within your argument.

However, we emphasize the importance of certainty, as using prolepsis without it can backfire, potentially creating more doubt in your audience rather than resolving it.

For a real-life example, imagine a sales person saying to a potential customer, 'I'm not here to sell you something I'm overly enthusiastic about.' There's nothing worse for your audience than to make them aware of an objection they haven't even thought of.

Case Study (1st part): You're a candidate in the presidential election. After a thunderous start, your campaign has stalled. Your opponents have found a new line of attack. They constantly repeat, everywhere and at all times, that you've never served as a governor or senator—which is true, unfortunately. And so, they argue that you're therefore not qualified to hold the highest office — which is absurd, of course. You know that every time you speak, voters will now be unable to stop themselves from wondering: is he/she really fit for such a mission? In the middle of a rally, you launch into a tirade: "I hear some people saying that I've never been a governor or senator. They are right. Over the last thirty years, I have simply been a successful business leader, a director of a major university, a congressman, the chair of a political party, the head of a parliamentary commission, and the Speaker of the House. Forgive my lack of experience! But you know, I'm not the only one: imagine that General Eisenhower himself had never held elected office before becoming President and founding the interstate highway system! Well, that’s one of the many things we have in common!"

Decoding: The use of prolepsis was very appropriate here. We reassured our voters about the legitimacy of our candidacy and prevented our opponents from having an easy point of attack. However, it was critical to wait until the objection was prominent in public debate before addressing it. Bringing it up at the start of the campaign would likely have caused more harm than good.

2. Prolepsis in a competitive context

In a competitive context, speakers are most fearful of objections.

When your opponent is trying to persuade you, they'll exploit any loophole and won't hold back. This means you must align your strategy accordingly.

At first glance, using proleptic language to preemptively address potential objections might seem appealing. It allows you to control the narrative and prevent your opponent from undermining your argument with unfair or destructive points.

However, here are three reasons why prolepsis can be counterproductive:

• Wasting Time: You spend valuable seconds or even minutes addressing potential objections instead of developing your own arguments.

• Helping Your Opponent: By venturing into your opponent's territory, you risk providing them with arguments they can use directly against you.

• The "Damp Squib" Effect: An experienced opponent may simply ignore your proleptic statements, leaving you with the consequence of highlighting them to your detriment.

In competitive contexts, relying solely on a strategy based on logic and fair play can be your worst enemy. Success lies in staying one step ahead of your opponent.

Case Study (2nd part): You finally made it past the primary round of the presidential election. You now have to face your opponent in the traditional debate before the final election, where you expect to be attacked on an embarrassing issue. In your platform, your advocate for a significant reform of Social Security to move towards universal healthcare, even though, four years earlier, you gave a passionate speech in Congress defending the current system. As journalists bring up this issue, you decide to preempt: "I know what you're going to say. You’re going to bring up that old speech I gave years ago in Congress. But consider this: the situation has changed considerably since then. Our country is becoming increasingly unequal, and things need to change. Healthcare should never be the preserve of the wealthy. That's what I will do when I am President of the United States." My opponent flashes a predatory smile and replies: "A few years ago, you said on TV that the USA was not culturally ready for universal healthcare. I don’t change my mind every other day. I don’t say everything and its opposite. Unlike you, I’m not a flip-flopper: I don't promise the impossible. You say what you think you need to say to get elected!"

Decoding: We're in significant trouble. Not only has our opponent ignored our prolepsis, but they've also turned it against us. It would have been more effective to let our opponent launch the first attack, allowing us to respond from a stronger position.Except for the exceptional context mentioned earlier, there's one golden rule to remember: when you know you'll only have one chance to speak (such as a lawyer delivering a closing argument to magistrates and jurors), prolepsis is your best ally.

Since you won't have the opportunity to respond to objections later, addressing them preemptively is crucial. It may not always be sufficient, but it's better than nothing.