What is an example of a counterargument Defoe uses in "The Education of Women"?

Defoe's
essay on the education of women was, for its time, very unconventional.  Most men, even
enlightened men, subscribed to the belief that women were not equipped intellectually to deal
with the complexities of the world.  Samuel Johnson, for example, one of the most accomplished
writers of the 18thC, is reported to have said in response to a question about a Quaker female
preacher, "Sir, a woman's preaching is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is notdone
well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."  Johnson's observation, unfortunately,
articulates the average educated man's attitude toward women in the mid-18thC.

In "The Education of Women," Defoe tries to convince by every logical
argument he can muster, including appealing to religious sensibilities:

If knowledge and understanding had been useless additions to the
sex, GOD Almighty would never have given them capacities; for he made nothing
needless.

In other words, if God gave women the capacity
to learn, then he expected them to become educated or he would not have given them the capacity
in the first place.  This argument was designed to appeal to enlightened men on two bases--logic
and religion.  If God gave women the brains to learn, then withholding education from them was
an affront to God, not to mention a waste of human potential.

Defoe goes so
far as to suggest the appropriate curriculum for women: languages, particularly French and
Italian;and elocution, "the graces of speech;" reading, so they could understand
history and "understand the world."  There is, in the midst of Defoe's argument, a
fair amount of male chauvinism remaining in Defoe--"Tempers, indeed, may in some degree
influence them. . . ."  Women, for all their capabilities, are still more subject to
emotions than men.  What can one do?

The counter argument against educating
women is expressed in the negative, that is, if we do not allow women to be
educated, this is what we get: women will be "impertinent and talkative;" if a woman's
temper is already bad, ignorance will make her "haughty, insolent, and loud;" even
worse, if she is a passionate  person, her lack of education will make her "much
at one with Lunatic."  Defoe's counter arguments, then, establish several
propositions that are not actually true but sound like legitimate arguments.

A secondary counter argument, one that would naturally comfort men, is Defoe's
assertion that he is not "exalting the female government in the least: but . . .I
would have men take women for companions, and educate them to be fit for it."
Defoe wants to assure men, of course, that when he argues for women's education he is
making a practical suggestion in order to make women better companions for men, not to exalt
them above men.  Defoe is not, in the end, a feminist--he is simply trying to improve men's
lives by upgrading their companions.