I. Arguments
1, for objective things or problems, directly put forward your own views and opinions, clarify your own reasons, and show that your attitude is an argument. To put it another way, argument is a form of argument that directly proves the correctness of one's argument from the front with sufficient and powerful evidence. Arguments are sometimes based on breaking, meaning "breaking first and then standing" and "standing and breaking". Argumentation is the focus of discussion. No matter what kind of argumentative paper you write, you must make an argument, and refuting others' arguments is also to establish your own arguments.
2. Summary of argument knowledge points
Three elements of argumentation: argument, argument and argumentation process.
The argument should be clear and correct. What is in favor and what is against should be clearly expressed in the form of judgment; You can't express your views and opinions in ambiguous ways such as "probably", "possibly" and "in short".
The position of the argument is in the usual order: it can be on the topic; Can be at the beginning of the article; Can be at the end of the text; It can also be in the middle of the article; It can also be summarized by several sub-arguments.
Second, paradox.
Refutation is an argument method to refute the enemy's argument, prove its error and absurdity, and thus prove its own point of view is correct. Refutation can be divided into three types: refutation point, refutation basis and refutation argument.
Refutation, like argument, is a way of discussion and reasoning. When refuting arguments, we should distinguish contradictions of different natures and adhere to the principle of convincing people by reasoning. In an article, arguments and refutations often complement each other.
To refute the argument, we must possess the materials in advance, make a thorough analysis of the false statements, find out the crux of the problem, concentrate on it, and hit the nail on the head. "It is better to break one finger than to hurt its ten fingers", which is the main point of refutation. Only by refuting the wrong argument can the correct argument be established.
To refute the argument, we must choose the right angle. Just like fighting a war, if the attack angle is not chosen well, you can't give the enemy a fatal blow.
Refutation method
The most basic refutation method is to put facts and reason, and all kinds of argumentation methods can be used in refutation.
The general methods of refutation include refutation point, refutation basis and refutation argument.
Refutation point is to refute the fundamental mistakes in the argument of the article and the part that conflicts with the relevant basic principles.
Refutation is to refute the support of the article-argument, which can be refuted directly or by summarizing the fallacies in the argument.
Refutation argument is to refute the way of argument in the article. Argumentation, for example, can be to find out the part of the example that is inconsistent with the facts and reasons. For parallelism argument, it can be pointed out that
The unreasonable part of parallelism can be refuted by philosophical knowledge, pointing out its mistakes in rational argument (Marxist principle).
The commonly used refutation methods include direct refutation and reduction to absurdity. (Argumentation and argumentation belong to the way of argumentation)
(1) Direct rebuttal is a way to directly prove the enemy's argument wrong by argument or reasoning.
(2) disproof, in order to prove that the other side's argument is wrong, you can first prove that another argument that contradicts it is correct. This is called reduction to absurdity. For example, in the article "Have China People Lost Confidence", Lu Xun put forward the positive argument "Have we lost confidence in China" in order to refute the wrong argument, and then proved the correctness of this argument with facts from ancient times to modern times, thus refuting the negative argument.
(3) reduction to absurdity, first assume that the other party's argument is right, and then on its premise, deduce an obviously absurd conclusion, thus proving that the other party's argument is wrong. For example, if we analyze according to the theories described by those political elites, we will only have the reality that all or at least most countries that have embarked on the road of capitalist privatization have developed faster than the socialist economy. But unfortunately, this reality does not exist, and this substance has never existed in the real world.