Graham calls the counter-argument “the first form of persuasive disagreements” and says we can normally ignore the DH0-3 level. This tactic is “the most powerful form of disagreement,” Graham said. It depends on what you are talking about, but it largely means disproveing someone`s central point. This contrasts with the fact that only minor arguments are refuted – a form of “deliberate dishonesty” in a debate. An example is correcting a person`s grammar (which refers you to the DH1 level) or highlighting factual errors in names or numbers. If these are not decisive details, an attack only serves to discredit the opponent, not his main idea. Visualized as an infographic, the hierarchy forms a pyramid with the most convincing kind of disagreements at the top. According to Paul Graham, it is also the least common. Not only does it take a certain skill to identify and find the central point of an argument, as is refuted, but this type of argument also requires the opponent to engage at the central point of the argument.
This is rare because we often tend to reorganize arguments to try to make the central point something else. Graham also saw his hierarchy as a way to eliminate dishonest arguments or “fake news” in modern language. Powerful words are only a “quality of definition of a demagogue,” he stressed. By understanding the different forms of their disagreement, “we give critical readers a pin to slam such balloons,” Graham wrote. It is a superior form of flesh treatment proper of the argument. In this form of disagreement, you offer an opposite case, but very little evidence. You are simply saying what you think is true, contrary to the position of the person you are arguing with. Graham cites this example: valuable learning is done at all levels of Bloom`s cognitive domain, starting with memorizing what is exposed, and resulting in the creation of original knowledge. All levels are valid and can be used in certain points. Everyone probably has his personal example, where he witnessed a 0-1 job with a big impact.
You can all enjoy, entertainment and communication the immersion of the main direction of your argument. But it`s about balance and respect for yourself and your audience. The most convincing form of disagreement. Here, you identify the main point that someone makes and destroys. The difference between this one and DH5 (refutation) is that there is no room for errors – you choose the central message transmitted by the opponent and you suggest why it is defective. It could be seen as a subset of DH5 rather than as a whole other level on the pyramid, as they are structurally identical. I agree. Sometimes level 1-3 is useful, even necessary, depending on who you are talking to and your intention. not quite sure above 0, but it may have its use.
there are people in the world who see silent professional behavior as a sign of weakness and disbelief, so levels 1-3 are more appropriate for these people.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.