Scene language skills that college students must know

Chapter 37 Scene 37 - When Refuting Absurd Statements
Chapter 37 Scene 37 - When Refuting Absurd Statements
In our daily life, we often face ridiculous remarks from all sides. At this time, we have to find ways to target
refute the erroneous ideas, viewpoints, and propositions of the other side, so as to promote their own thoughts, viewpoints, and propositions.When contradicting others,
Don't extravagantly seek to convince the other party with boring reasons, but require the rebutter to be quick in thinking, master flexible and skillful rebuttal methods and

Coping skills that make the other party speechless at the right time and place. ?
There are too many methods and techniques to refute, and they will be analyzed below:
([-]) Attack one point?
Attacking one point is a commonly used method when refuting, that is, when one is threatened by the other party's speech, in order to save oneself, one should

In order to counterattack the opponent, use a certain point of paradox in the opponent's attack as an excuse and make use of it.The key to this "point" is the

It can not only free oneself, but also attack the opponent's vital points.To attack one point, the "point" must be extremely explosive and lethal

Only when you have strength can you point directly at the opponent's pain point, and at the same time make yourself change from passive to active through counterattack. ?
In the general election held in the Philippines from the end of 1985 to the beginning of 1986, Mrs. Aquino had a contest with the ruling party candidate Marcos.

Fierce campaign debate.Marcos said during the debate: "Mrs. Aquino has no experience and doesn't understand politics."
Immediately counterattack: "What has Marcos, who claims to be experienced and politically aware, made the country?"

Then there is nothing to say.Mrs. Aquino took advantage of the situation and continued to fight back: "Although I am a layman in politics, as a family who revolves around the pot

Housewife, I am well versed in everyday economics. "?
Here, Mrs. Aquino seized on the four characters of "daily economy" and pointed the finger at some people in the ruling party for a long time.
Playing tricks to mess up the national economy and the people's livelihood. ?
([-]) Hit the vitals?

This is to grasp the argument of the other party's conversation, analyze and dissect it, and expose the essence of its fallacy. ?
"Warring?There is such a story in Qi Ce:?

The king of Qi State intends to go to court with the king of Qin and profess his minister to the king of Qin.When he walked out of Yongmen, Sima of Yongmen stepped forward and said to him:?

"When you become a king, do you want to be a king or do you want to be a king?"
King Qi replied:?

"Of course it's for Sheji!"?
Sima said:?

"Since you became king for the sake of the country, why did you lose the country and become a minister to the King of Qin?"?
King Qi felt that Sima's words were reasonable, so he turned the horse's head and drove back. ?
Why did Sima of Yongmen's words make King Qi, who went to see King Qin, drive back in his car?Because what Sima said hit the mark of King Qi.

harm.The key point is: if you are king for the sake of the country, why leave your own country to submit to the king of Qin? ?
([-]) Reductio absurdity by analogy?

In the method of analogy and absurdity, according to the reason of the refuted point of view, find out a class of similar and absurd cases that are similar to it.
An analogy, showing the fallacy of the idea being refuted.This is a powerful rebuttal. ?
It is said that a white pastor questioned a black leader: "Sir, since you are interested in the cause of black liberation, and there are many blacks in Africa, you
Why not go to Africa? The black leader replied: "Since your Excellency is interested in soul liberation, there are many souls in hell, why don't you go to hell?"

What about prison? "Here the black leader resorted to reductio ad absurdum, which silenced the white pastor. ?
German female mathematician Amy?After Nord received her Ph.D., she could not start classes immediately because she had not yet qualified as a lecturer.

But her knowledge and talent were appreciated by Professor Hilbert who was engaged in the research of general relativity. ?
At a professor meeting, for Amy?There was a debate over whether Nord could become a lecturer.A professor said excitedly: ?

"How can a woman be a lecturer? If she becomes a lecturer, she will become a professor in the future, and even enter the university council.
Can the Tao allow a woman to enter the highest academic institution of the university? "?
Professor Hilbert retorted: ?

"Gentlemen, a candidate's sex should never be a reason against her being a lecturer, I draw the attention of gentlemen: University Senate

, After all, it is not a bathhouse! "?
The other party was immediately speechless. ?
Against Emmy?The reason why the professor who taught Nord was excited because he believed that women should not be admitted to the university council

.In response to his views, Hilbert introduced the "bathhouse" and then compared the university senate to the bathhouse.
, pointing out that gender restrictions on bathhouses do not apply to university senates, the two are fundamentally different things, thus effectively denying

The basis for the opponent's argument was revealed, leaving him speechless.

([-]) Hit its loopholes?

When the other party is attacking yourself, ignore the other party for the time being, but seize the other party's loopholes and point out what they are doing according to the other party's logic.
The bigger mistakes he made made him overwhelmed. ?
In the Ming Dynasty, the young master of Shaoxing Mansion robbed other children of their shuttlecocks one day and made them cry.Just when Xu Wenchang was passing by, he took

The shuttlecock was taken from the young master and returned to the child.Unexpectedly, because the little boy is usually pampered, he burst into tears all of a sudden.
He made a fuss and said that Xu Wenchang bullied him.So, the servant took Xu Wenchang to the court to see the magistrate.The prefect shouted sharply: "You
The young master who bullied me is a magistrate with no roots, can you be convicted? "Xu Wenchang sneered and said: "As far as I can see, you, an adult, don't know
sin! "The magistrate shouted loudly: "What am I not guilty of? ! "Xu Wenchang said: "You son has been kicking the shuttlecock early in the morning, my lord.
You must know that there are feathers on the shuttlecock and copper coins on the bottom.The year name of Emperor Jiajing is printed on the copper coin.The little boy is now carrying
Hairy hair, kicking long live, isn't it deceiving the king?As the saying goes: "The son is unworthy, the father's fault." 'What should my lord do? "?
In this story, the logic of the magistrate is: you robbed my young master's shuttlecock, you have no power, and you should be punished.against it
Xu Wenchang does not dispute the logic for the time being, but draws a similar conclusion according to its same logic: the magistrate's son also robbed
someone else

Not only snatched the shuttlecock, but also kicked the "emperor" around, so the magistrate, as a father, also committed the crime of deceiving the emperor.
He deserves to be executed for his crime.When Xu Wenchang said this, it was tantamount to slapping the magistrate even harder.

([-]) Citing the past to prove the present?

The so-called citing the past to prove the present is to quote the incisive language of the ancients to explain the truth at hand.This method of citation usually maintains its own
Use when viewing.People say that we should read more ancient books. The purpose of reading ancient books is to learn the wisdom and experience left by our predecessors.exist
When writing articles and having conversations, many people like to quote a sentence or two from the ancients to explain the profound truth in order to convince others

The expected purpose of this is to quote the past to prove the present. ?
Since there was no photographic technology in ancient my country, in order to prevent impostors during the imperial examination, candidates must fill in their names clearly.
The appearance characteristics, so that the examiner can check in the examination hall. ?
According to legend, in the Ming Dynasty, when an examinee filled in his facial features, one of the items was "tiny beard".I saw it when the examiner made his rounds

The examinee had a little beard on his face, and he was furious: "Why are you cheating? You obviously have a beard on your face, why?

Write on the test sheet that you don't have a beard? The examinee replied: "I obviously have a little beard, why don't I have no beard?" "examiner
Then he said: "'Wei' means 'no'. In Fan Zhongyan's "Yueyang Tower", there is a sentence of "Weisi people, who am I to return?"
If there is no one who worries about the world's worries first and enjoys the world's joys later, who am I to be with? The examinee countered and said: "In the ancient book,
Said, "Confucius passed the Song Dynasty in micro-service" (micro-service refers to the light and simple attire that does not reveal the identity of officials), if "micro" is only "no"

Speaking, does it mean that Confucius went to Song State naked? "?
The invigilator simply cited a word meaning of "Wei" in "Yueyang Tower" and rashly concluded that all "Wei" are "

"No", the examinee cited counter-examples, which made the invigilator speechless. ?
([-]) Contrasting citations?

The art of contrasting citations is to compare two things that presuppose the same condition.When there is a fallacy in the things in front of you, use it

When the right words cannot be explained clearly, cite the same result produced by the association of another thing to prove the self in the thing in front of you.
correct point of view.In this way, once they are compared with each other, the fallacies of the other party will be self-defeating.Please see the following example: ?

A certain gentleman complains all day long about his wife's embarrassment.Once, my wife took a photo of her wearing a swimsuit in a seaside park during a group day event.

Group portrait.This gentleman was furious after seeing the photo:?
"Absurd, why don't you take a group photo together? Although they are all standing, they are always on the same plane. If they lean back 90 degrees, what will happen?"

Waiting for the scene? "?
The wife was out of breath, and fought back while crying: "Don't you also squeeze the bus every day? When you squeeze the bus, you push and shove, and people stick to each other very well."
It's tight, it's more common to rub your ears and temples at peak times. According to your logical reasoning, isn't this better than standing side by side on the sunbath?
Hot?Even more absurd? "?
This gentleman thought that he had absolutely a reason to ridicule his wife, but he didn't expect his wife not only not to be frightened, but also to use the way of comparison and citation to make it clear.

He pushed back, and immediately made a big face—lost his temper. ?
([-]) Reduction to absurdity?

This is to extend the other party's argument, and after inference, draw out its absurdity, so as to refute the other party's argument is wrong
. ?
Legend has it that once upon a time, a poor scholar went to pay homage to the old abbot in a monastery.When the abbot received the scholar, he saw the scholar's green clothes and cap,
He was very shabby, so his attitude was very arrogant, and he didn't invite scholars to sit down.Just at this time, the abbot heard that a son of a state official came to the temple.
When the courtyard came to offer incense, he quickly left the scholar and bent down to greet him at the steps in front of the temple. ?
Afterwards, the scholar asked the abbot:?
"Master is so arrogant to me, but so respectful to the state official, why?"?
The abbot argued sophistry:?

"Pick it up or not, or if you don't pick it up."?
When the scholar heard this, he was furious. He picked up the Buddhist staff beside him and hit the abbot a few times, saying:?
"Master, don't blame me. If you hit me, you don't hit me. If you don't hit me, you hit me."?
The abbot was speechless. ?
The abbot used his absurd words of "if you don't pick up, if you don't pick up, you're going to pick up" to cover up his ugly behavior of thinking of the low and the high.Xiucai took over this fallacy
, and extended it to the absurd conclusion of "hitting is not hitting, not hitting is hitting", which made the monk suffer a lot and was speechless. ?
([-]) Attacking the shield with a spear?

This is to compare the contradictory words of the other party and let the other party slap their own mouths.

There is a joke in "Playing Talk Record":?

There are two worshiping brothers, and the brothers like to talk big and lie the most. ?
On this day, the two worshiping brothers met, and the elder brother spoke big words and lies again.Brother said:?
"I ate a big steamed dumpling yesterday. I used 100 catties of flour, 80 catties of meat, and 20 catties of vegetables. I only made one dumpling.
, put it on four combined tables, and barely put it down.More than [-] people gathered around to eat. After eating for a day and a night, they still haven't eaten yet.

Halfway through, the two people suddenly disappeared. Everyone looked around, and suddenly heard someone talking in the dumpling. When we opened it, it turned out that it was this
The two of them got into the dumplings and ate stuffing.Do you think this dumpling is big? "?
The younger brother said:?

"It's not big. You didn't see the meat buns I ate a few days ago. That's big! Dozens of people ate them for three days and three nights, but still haven't seen any fillings.

.Hurry up to eat it, and eat a big stone tablet, which reads: There are still 30 miles away from the stuffing.See if it's bigger than the dumpling you said
? "?
Brother said:?

"You big bun, what kind of pot did you use to steam it?"?
The younger brother said:?

"It's the pot where you steamed the dumplings!"?
In this joke, the brother boasted all over the sky, and the brother used the spear of the son to attack the shield of the son, and skillfully exposed the brother's lies. ?
The methods and skills of refuting the other party should be flexibly applied according to different circumstances, and should not be limited to the above-mentioned ones.Only when used properly can

can achieve the corresponding effect.

(End of this chapter)