What is this?

② Why (pros and cons)

(3) the causes of undesirable phenomena (or why two keywords conflict)

(4) How to do it (how to solve this bad phenomenon or conflict)

Note: ② and ③ There are also "positive and negative analysis" in "positive and negative analysis".

The concept of dialectical topic;

① Find two keywords (A and B)

(2) Determine which keyword is more meaningful to discuss (assuming that A is more meaningful).

So your idea is: A is helpful to B, or B is realized and needs A.

B, how to write the debate topic?

(1) Why did you choose A?

(2) Why not choose B?

(3) Although A has some defects, I can overcome him or I can achieve the effect of B by choosing A, or A is not what B thinks, but it is actually. ...

C. Expanding the thinking of dialectical topic writing

We often say that when writing, there is nothing to say and no way to start? I hope the following methods can help you.

First, you can think about the point of view (sub-argument) of each paragraph first. At this time, you can use the "association method" to find a topic from the theme.

For example, on the topic of "innovation", how to refine its argument? You can think about the groups that the enterprise will involve first. -"enterprise subject", "enterprise user" and "competitor"

The impact of "innovation" on enterprise users: improve users' brand awareness and loyalty to the enterprise, and meet users' differentiated needs.

"Innovation" to competitors: In the era of homogenization, we should avoid imitation from other enterprises in a short time, take the lead in the market and make corresponding profits.

Second, how to make your argument convincing.

Need profound analysis and demonstration.

1. What is analysis? Let's make the first explanation: proving another viewpoint through one viewpoint is actually an analysis process.

The first difference between "in-depth analysis" and "analysis without depth" is that your analysis makes "readers ask why there is so much room". Let the reader "ask why there is less space", and the deeper the analysis.

2. How to deepen the analysis?

The more "objective descriptions" we have in our analysis, the more convincing your analysis will actually be, and the less room for people to ask "why". Because objective reality is generally more difficult to refute and more convincing.

3. "What is analysis" as the second explanation:

By "objective description+subjective description" to demonstrate a point of view, such analysis will be more in-depth.

We can call "objective description" as "fact" and "subjective description" as "viewpoint or truth". Can you understand why you always say "put facts and reason"? Because it is not enough to make sense, you need to make your reason more convincing through factual description. (Note that the facts here do not refer to "examples", but describe the characteristics of an objective phenomenon or thing)

So, when you want to prove a point, you can think about it. What characteristics do you want to prove in the field of this idea? Or what are the objective characteristics of things? Further combine this objective feature to demonstrate your point of view.