learn to speak, learn etiquette

Chapter 12 Learning to speak sophistry (2)
B: Of course, only half of it can be seen!
A: Have you seen how much the half ticket is?

B: Of course I see clearly, the triangular money.

A: You can only see half of it, so you should pay [-] cents for the ticket, right?
In the example, A uses the proof-seeking type of questioning technique.The characteristic of this technique is to achieve the purpose of intercepting sophistry by destroying the foundation of sophistry.Two points should be paid attention to when using it: First, no matter how you destroy the sophistry, you must achieve a purpose—to make the sophistry's arguments lose their ability to prove.The path of destruction can be legitimate or illegitimate.All it takes is to deprive sophistry of its support.Second, in terms of the way of expression, you should force the other party in the form of questioning until the other party is in a situation where you can't make up your mind.The nature of persecution is the main source of the power of this technique.

5.classical dialectics
The classical debate method is a method of debate in which the allusions summed up by the ancients or modern people have been proved by practice.

The argumentative significance of the allusion: first, it has a distinct image, which has been tested for a long time;Therefore, reasoning with allusions often has good results.

6.Asking the way
In order to find out the depth of the river, people often drop a small stone into the river to test the depth of the river.As a strategy of debate, the stone-throwing method is to throw a "stone" at the opponent to test the opponent's intention and attitude in order to achieve the desired goal more safely when the opponent's intention is not understood, so as to grasp the truth. , find out the details, as the basis for the next action.

7.seek common ground while reserving differences
Seeking common ground while reserving differences means that in order to seek agreement on basic principles, we can reserve different opinions on some minor non-principle issues.In interpersonal communication and international affairs, in order to seek common interests and achieve common goals, do not entangle in secondary contradictions or non-principle issues, but try to find common ground between the two sides, seek common goals and unified actions, Avoid or reserve differences and opinions between each other to deal with major contradictions and common enemies.

8.pros and cons
The method of pros and cons is to refute the opponent, not only put forward the positive point of view intended to be accepted by the other party, put forward positive arguments, but also involve negative points of view and negative arguments.Through the comparison of the positive and negative sides, determine the correctness of the positive point of view, so that the other party can accept the positive point of view.

9.side argument
The side argumentation method refers to that in the process of debate, when the debater cannot find a basis for a while, or there is no such basis as the criterion of the argument at all, he uses the side or similar basis as the criterion of the argument to refute the opponent and convince the opponent. , to achieve the desired purpose.

10.external force method

The method of using external force is often used as a metaphor to use external force to subdue the opponent.It refers to not directly refuting the other party during the debate, but taking the loopholes in the other party's topic as a breakthrough, taking over the other party's talk on the spot, pushing the boat along the way, attacking suddenly, turning unfavorable factors into favorable factors, and catching the other party by surprise.

11.reverse thinking

Reverse thinking method refers to a way of thinking, which is contrary to the way of thinking about problems such as common sense, common sense, common sense, common law, and routine, and jumps out of the circle of "homeopathic thinking" to the opposite and different directions and angles. "Reverse Thinking".This method is used in debates, which means that the debaters are good at thinking about problems from diametrically opposite angles, and put forward unique and original opinions to debate and reason.

12. "Broaden the scope" approach
In the early 60s, Premier Zhou Enlai attended a press conference held in the Indian Presidential Palace. A reporter from the Women’s News Agency asked him: "Your Excellency, as a 62-year-old person, you look very good. How do you pay attention to yourself?" health? Do you exercise regularly? Or do you have a special diet?"

It should be said that the reporter's question was very specific, especially "whether there is a special diet" was more difficult. In the face of difficult problems, Premier Zhou responded alertly and calmly. He avoided the other party's questions about the specific details of "exercise" or "diet". Instead of asking questions and answering them in more general and abstract terms, he said:

"Thank you. I am an Oriental, and I live the Oriental way of life."

Because Premier Zhou used this kind of evasive answer of "expanding the scope" to make the language implicit and vague, the answer became very polite and decent, but also humorous.Situations like this are especially common on some diplomatic occasions.Some have even called some "extended scope" evasions "great nonsense".In fact, being good at talking "nonsense" is sometimes a skill that diplomats must possess in certain situations.

13. "Shift Target" Method
In the Soviet film "The Battle of Moscow", the German army approached the city, and the Soviet Supreme Command held an emergency meeting. A member of the Politburo suggested that Comrade Stalin be randomly shut down and the factory be evacuated from Moscow to ensure Stalin's safety.At this time, Stalin replied: "I want to discuss this issue with Comrade Stalin himself." Then he turned and walked into his office.

Obviously he was Stalin, but he still said "to discuss with Comrade Stalin himself." Obviously, Stalin was unwilling to evacuate Moscow. He deliberately avoided this question, so he used the evasive method of "shifting the target" here.

In the evasive answer of "shifting the target", the "target" cannot be "transferred" randomly, but there should be some direct or indirect connection with the question asked, so that the answer reflects a word of "clever". .Such as a little humor:
Student: How long does a mouse live?

Professor: Well, it depends on the cat.

Here, the professor avoided the students' questions and shifted his target to "cat", and there is a delicate relationship between "cat" and "mouse".

14.self-evident law

Self-evident method refers to an argumentation strategy that, in a special language environment, uses actions, facial expressions, etc. to launch a psychological offensive to the other party and express one's own opinions. Although it is silent, it is better than sound, so as to achieve the desired purpose.

15.fallacies against fallacies
Treating the absurd with the absurd means not rushing to refute the absurd remarks of the opponent. The "circle outside the circle" treats the wrong with the wrong, and returns the evil with the evil, so that the fallacy will be self-defeating.

16. "everyone knows" law
At a press conference, a foreign reporter asked Wang Meng: "What are the similarities and differences between Wang Meng in the 50s and Wang Meng in the 80s?"

This issue spans a long time, and it is difficult to summarize clearly in a few words.Wang Meng replied: "My name was Wang Meng in the 50s, and I was still called Wang Meng in the 80s. This is the same thing; the difference is that Wang Meng in the 50s was in his 20s, while in the 80s Wang Meng was in his 50s."

Wang Meng's answer is obviously using "well-known" words to avoid the potential intention of the reporter. From the perspective of structure and information, it will be redundant, but he can quite embody the wit and humor of the writer, and arouse people's joyful emotions. No wonder the reporters present praised Wang Meng's witty remarks.

It can be seen from this that avoiding and answering cleverly is indeed a wonderful way to get rid of embarrassment and create humor.

17.step by step
Every step of the way means that every time the army advances, a camp is set up, which describes steady and steady fighting.The step-by-step method is used in debates. It refers to adopting a layered approach to those opponents who are difficult to deal with or things that are not easy to persuade. Layers of rebuttal methods.

18.Reasonable and disciplined
Being reasonable is a kind of temperance and etiquette in international affairs and interpersonal communication, that is, to achieve self-respect without arrogance, enthusiasm without flattery, indifference without disrespect, anger without losing control, advance and retreat in a moderate manner, neither humble nor overbearing .

19.answer complete method
The basic task of debate defense is to stand firm and consolidate arguments.In the face of the opponent's attack, a decent and complete response becomes the main means to block the offensive and consolidate your proposition.From the actual situation, different response methods have different effects.The best response should meet the following four goals at the same time: first, it is conducive to consolidating one's own arguments; second, it does not leave loopholes and gaps for the other party; Our attack is ready to pave the way.To this end, in the response content to do:
(1) Does not violate the laws of logic.Arguments and demonstrations must be meticulous, comprehensive, dialectical, foresight, and pursue perfection.From content to expression, it must be rigorous and complete, pay attention to comprehensiveness, and prevent one-sidedness.Make the main argument consistent with the sub-arguments, the facts, arguments, and figures cited are consistent, the language expression is consistent, and the participants on the side are consistent, so as to prevent inconsistencies, collisions, melees, and self-destruction Great Wall.Such a line of defense can be impeccable.

(2) Use "common sense" with caution.In discussing the answer, it is necessary to consider common sense.Because some common senses are conditional and have no universal significance, if the conclusions are inferred based on these common senses, one-sidedness will inevitably appear.For example: "His brain is not stupid, why can't his grades improve? As the saying goes, 'When you get close to vermilion, you get red; In this way, the conclusions drawn by reasoning with common sayings are too arbitrary and generalized, and it is easy to give people a handle and attract attacks.

(3) To prevent loss of speech.In the debate, it is necessary to grasp the relationship between thinking and expression, and handle the speed and rhythm of the response.Be calm and calm, think as closely as possible, and don't just seek quickness and cause loss of speech, especially in the free debate stage. The reaction speed of each other is very fast, and sometimes you may blurt out without thinking well, resulting in loss of speech, which becomes an excuse for the opponent to attack.Losing the big because of the small, it is easy to fall into passivity and panic, which should be avoided as much as possible in defensive operations.

20.Defensive and offensive
Debate defense uses response as the main method, but it does not completely abandon offensive rebuttal.On the contrary, under the premise of stabilizing the defense line, rely on the bottom line to wait for an opportunity to take appropriate tactical actions, surprise the opponent, strive to make a difference, and accumulate victories.

(1) Combining defensive operations with setting traps to kill opponents.Most of the defensive operations are carried out in the battlefield area of ​​the own side. If the enemy is full of energy and the side retreats, at this time, the side deliberately sets traps, which can easily paralyze the opponent and achieve success.For example, the South Korean team argued with the Hong Kong team that "Confucianism is the main driving factor for the rapid economic growth of the 'four tigers' in Asia." Which one, which paragraph, of Confucianism is this?Zheng Fang replied: "This reflects the Confucian idea of ​​emphasizing the leading role of the state and the government."The opposing party immediately dismissed Hong Kong's laissez-faire economic policy, and asked the affirmative how to explain this, but the other party was speechless.The opposing side scores on defense.

(2) Combining defense with luring the enemy to subdue the opponent.When your side is in a defensive position, facing the opponent's offensive, you might as well use your tactics, avoid answering some questions, make the illusion that your defense is empty, and induce the opponent to attack wantonly, and then suddenly come up with the most powerful attack. If the opponent is caught off guard, it disrupts their offensive momentum and creates psychological pressure, so that the opponent will not dare to attack rashly when they clearly have an advantage.For example, when the South University team debated with the Taiwan University team on the issue of peaceful coexistence of human beings, the Taiwan University team accused the other party of not being able to cite historical experience to illustrate the possibility of human peaceful coexistence, but the South University team avoided answering.The National Taiwan University team is getting more and more energetic, strengthening the offensive from a historical perspective.At this time, the South Brigade suddenly threw out the famous anthropologist Malinowski's assertion that war is not an innate product of human beings, and that Australian aborigines did not have wars at all before the arrival of Europeans, Eskimos, etc. People have never known what war is and other examples, so they fought back. The Taiwan University was hit by a stick and never dared to attack from a historical perspective.In this round, the Zhongnan team scored.

(3) Implement short assaults.In defensive operations, one cannot always respond negatively to the opponent's questions and let the opponent lead by the nose.The effective way is to rely on one's own line of defense, stand up less and refute more, ask questions after answering, and launch a short assault on the opponent.Concentrate on discovering problems in the opponent's arguments, launch frequent attacks, and always lead the combat strike point to the opponent's position.In doing so, on the one hand, it can cause the opponent's psychological tension and lead to confusion; on the other hand, it can make the opponent exhausted, reply and refute, and be unable to attack our point of view.

But there is one thing to pay attention to: just don't love to fight.When you are at a disadvantage, knowing that your side is at a disadvantage, and not as good as the opponent in terms of data and facts, even if you win in a short assault, don't love to fight. It is best to move the battlefield after a battle.Because, at this point, when confronting each other and fighting in depth, you are stretched and disadvantaged, and you adopt the tactic of withdrawing after the fight, grabbing one hand and leaving, you can accumulate small victories into big victories.

In short, some tactical strike actions are very consistent with the defensive posture, and there is a certain degree of "deception" in using them. If they are used well, they can receive a good effect of consolidating one's own arguments.

twenty one.Secret crossing
As a debating technique, stealthily crossing Chen Cang is to borrow the stratagem's strategy to admit or avoid the opponent's argument in the open, and then counterattack in a roundabout way, and refute the opponent's point of view in secret, so that the opponent loses unconsciously.

twenty two.Borrowing homophonic method skillfully
Cleverly borrowing the method of homonym refers to cleverly using phonetic means in the process of debate to form homonym misunderstandings, etc., to achieve the purpose of satirizing, mocking, and insinuating opponents in the debate.

twenty three.Fun Word Grammar
Using idioms, allusions, common sayings or metaphors, puns, etc., to give interesting explanations of one's own or others' negligence, words and deeds, that is, interesting interpretation of word grammar.

twenty four.blunt deterrence

Shock and deterrence is aimed at the interests of the opponent in the debate, shocking, intimidating and intimidating the opponent with extraordinary bearing and momentum. This method works very well.

One of the most important methods in the debate is to confront each other, mercilessly expose the questions raised by the other party, and refute them one by one.

25．defuse offensive
In the face of the powerful offensive of the enemy, we can find ways to take effective measures to resolve it, weaken its edge, and create conditions for counterattack.Some tactics are effective and can be used for reference.

(1) Implementation of mixing tactics.When you are hit and unable to refute, you can throw out some strange questions and examples, or examples that are not easy to explain, to force the other party to explain, so as to confuse the other party's thinking, make the other party confused for a while, and cause confusion, which can greatly improve the situation. To weaken the opponent's offensive momentum.For example, when arguing that "AIDS is a medical problem, not a social problem", the affirmative party says "AIDS happened in the hospital, so it is a medical problem", and the negative party immediately says "I picked up a bunch of keys in the hospital. Is this key a medical problem?" ?” The affirmative said that it is medical problems that need to be involved through medicine, and the opposite asked: “An old woman was knocked down and went to the hospital, but it was a traffic accident.” Such questions that are difficult to explain in a few words are constantly raised, intending to confuse the The opponent's front line weakens its offensive.

(2) Incorporate arguments and turn harm into benefit.When the opponent cites a large number of arguments to attack, we should analyze the multi-faceted nature of the case and transform it into evidence to prove our argument.In this way, if I take over the words and use them for me, I can defuse the opponent's offensive and stick to my position.For example, when the Macau East Asia University team and the South University team faced each other, the East Asia University team borrowed the saying "a clever woman can't cook without rice" and compared Confucianism with a clever woman, while the South University team used it for their own use, pointing out that a clever woman can match various recipes, It just reflects the flexible and correct strategic choice and policy coordination.In this way, the arguments used by the other party are collected as evidence for your own point of view.

(3) Distort the other party's point of view.Sometimes deliberately misinterpreting the arguments put forward by the other party, forcing the other party to repeat the explanation, so as to defuse the other party's offensive.

(4) Catching slips of the tongue.Sometimes catching the other party's speech loss, with a single touch, can hit the other party's spirit.For example, when debating whether the service quality can be improved under the current conditions of personnel and equipment, the opposing party said: "It is difficult for a good wife to cook without rice. Now that the equipment is outdated, the personnel are in short supply, and the business is extremely complicated, there is no potential to improve the service quality."

Zheng Fang said: "The actual situation now is not cooking without rice, but cooking with little rice. We don't have no equipment or personnel at all. Don't be afraid of being young. As long as you are really a clever woman and can really show your skills, you can still make up for some shortcomings."

Here, the other party quotes the idiom "cooking without rice", which is obviously not in line with the facts. He was caught by the opponent and was caught off guard. Subjective initiative, and thus received a very good rebuttal effect.

26．stick to the bottom line
As mentioned earlier, in competitive debates, the bottom line is the last line of defense.Sometimes our side loses the battle and has to retreat, but when we retreat to the bottom line, we can no longer retreat.If the bottom line is not guaranteed, once it is broken through, the argumentation system of this side will collapse across the board.Therefore, no matter how bad the situation is, we must not waver or back down on the bottom line.You should base yourself on the bottom line, stick to the bottom line, firmly grasp your own arguments, rely on your own advantages, repeatedly explain your own views and facts from different angles, strengthen and reiterate your own arguments, and do not make people feel repetitive.This will help stabilize the position, wait for the opportunity, and transform in a direction that is beneficial to the side.

27．hypothetical argument
Hypothetical argumentation is a method in which hypothetical conditions are used to reason and debate in the process of argumentation.

28．peace of mind
You are anxious, you are irritated, I am neither anxious nor angry, I calmly irritate the other party, add fuel to the fire of the anxious and annoyed, so as to disturb the other party's thinking, disrupt the other party's deployment, and weaken the other party's ability to argue Purpose.

29．know how to be generous
Knowing the law with generosity is a way for people to show a high profile when the interests of the motherland or nation conflict with the interests of individuals or groups, and when the other party criticizes and provokes them, show a high profile, show generosity to them, and finally make the other party discipline themselves, thereby resolving the conflict.

30．keep your word
(End of this chapter)