▶ AQUINAS (SUMMA STRUCTURE: OBJECTION, SED CONTRA, RESPONSE)·20–35 MIN

ANTICIPATING OBJECTIONS

For every position, list the three strongest objections — then answer them.

What this is

Aquinas wrote his Summa as objections-first: he stated the strongest case against each of his positions before defending them. The result was that anyone reading him couldn't accuse him of ignoring the difficulty. The same move works in any argument you're preparing — a paper, a conversation, a pitch. List three objections, name the smartest people who would make each, then answer.

Steps

1.Pick a claim you're going to argue. Something specific enough to be wrong.
2.Write three objections to it, in the strongest form you can muster (you've already practiced steelmanning).
3.For each objection, name a real or imagined person who'd press it. Make them specific — a thoughtful skeptic, not a strawman.
4.Write a one-paragraph response to each. Be honest if part of the objection lands; concede the part that's right and defend the part that isn't.
5.Read all three responses together. Is your overall position more nuanced now? Better-defined? Or did you just apologize and run?

▸ AFTER

Which objection did you find hardest to answer cleanly? That's where your view is weakest — and possibly where it's interesting.

Reflections you write below are saved to your trajectory — Claude reads the prose and adds a small dimensional shift to your map, the same way it does for daily dilemmas and diary entries.

Create an account Sign in

More on this practice

Aquinas built the entire Summa Theologiae around objections. Each section starts not with his position but with the strongest cases against it (the videtur quod sections — 'it would seem that...'), and only then offers his sed contra ('on the contrary') and his own argument. The architecture is itself a moral commitment: you don't get to defend your view without first taking seriously the people who disagree.

The medieval schools that developed this style trained students to argue both sides of every question before being allowed to take a position. The result was a generation of thinkers who couldn't be embarrassed by an objection because they'd already considered it.

Modern academic writing has retained a thinned version of this — 'in this paper I will respond to objections raised by...' — but the sharper practice is to write the objections as if you were their author, in your own voice, before responding. If you're going to lose anyway, lose to the strongest version of what's on the other side.

Common pitfalls

Writing token objections you can dispatch easily. Three weak objections do less work than one strong one.
Burying the response in qualifications. If part of the objection lands, concede it. The remaining defense is more credible.
Skipping the imaginative step of who'd press the objection. 'Some might argue...' is too vague; pick a specific person or type of person.

A worked example

Claim: remote work is broadly good. Objection 1 (from a sceptical manager): 'You can't build culture over Zoom; junior people stop learning by osmosis.' Response: partly right — synchronous in-person time matters, but the answer is hybrid, not all-in-office. Objection 2 (from a junior employee): 'I'm lonely.' Response: this is the real cost of the policy; companies should fund coworking, social meetups, in-person retreats. Objection 3 (from a city planner): 'Empty downtowns hurt businesses that depend on office workers.' Response: true, and a real cost — the policy needs city-level adjustments, not just employer-level ones. The original claim survives but is now nuanced into something that addresses real concerns rather than dismissing them.

Thinkers in this lineage

Thomas Aquinas — The Summa Theologiae's structure is the canonical exemplar of objection-first writing.
Peter Abelard — Sic et Non (Yes and No) collected contradictory authoritative quotations to train students in dialectical thinking.
John Stuart Mill — On Liberty Ch. 2 is one long argument that you don't actually understand your view until you can rebut its strongest opponent.

Where to read further

Selections from the Summa Theologiae
Thomas Aquinas
Read a few articles in the videtur-sed contra-respondeo structure to feel how the medieval objection-first method worked.
On Liberty
John Stuart Mill · 1859
Mill's argument that opposing views are necessary even for the truth-holder is the modern defense of the practice.

Pairs well with

Kindred practices

Devil's advocate — An institutional cousin — formally assigning someone to argue the opposing view in deliberation.

▶ What to do next