MelissaLupari

The thing to worry about is the reverse -- calling out something like, "What do you think you are doing?" or giving a vague "Some people say..." and then not actually attaching any evidence to the claim. It's easy to shoot down an imaginary objection that contains no evidence. It's much more of an accomplishment to present all the best evidence against your thesis, and then still defending it in a convincing way.

I'm glad to see you working through Roberts so steadily, Missy.

In my former life as an insurance claim adjuster, one of the best ways I learned to negotiate a settlement with a claimant or their attorney was to bring up all of THEIR best arguments FIRST, then diffuse them with MY best arguments. Assuming I had done a thorough job, once I was done talking, the only subejcts not already discussed were at worst their weakest arguments, which could be summarily handled. If I had brought out my best arguments as mere counters to their best arguments in a back-and forth kind of conversation, settlement became unlikely because both sides were still bogged down into their viewpoints. Fortunately, writing about literature is a lot less adversarial at our level, but it's interesting to note the practical applications, and I thank Melissa for pointing out the term "Procatalepsis".