Definition:
An argumentative paper based on refutation is a refuting paper. Refuting a paper is often broken while standing, that is, while refuting the wrong argument of the other party, it puts forward its own correct point of view in tit for tat.
There are three ways to refute the wrong argument: 1. Refutation point 2. Refutation basis 3. Refute an argument
But in the final analysis, it is to refute the point of view.
3 parameter mode editor
Argumentative papers are generally divided into argumentative papers and refuting papers.
(1) parameter
Argumentative writing is an argument method to explain the author's views and opinions on certain events or problems from the front. To write an argumentative essay, we must:
The argument should be correct and clear. Correctness means that the argument itself should conform to the objective reality and stand the test of practice. Distinctive means that the author must clearly express what he affirms, denies, agrees with and opposes, and must not be vague or ambiguous.
(2) The arguments should be true and sufficient. In other words, we must cite enough facts or recognized truths to prove the correctness of the argument.
Facts as arguments include representative and conclusive examples or historical facts, as well as statistical data. It is very convincing to use facts as arguments.
It is also very convincing to use scientific truth as an argument. If the principles, laws and formulas of natural science are taken as arguments, they can also play a powerful role in proving arguments.
(3) Argumentation must conform to the correct form of reasoning. Writing argumentative essays should be well-founded and logical. Argument commands argument, and argument proves argument. The argument must be sufficient to prove the argument, and the argument must be an inevitable conclusion inferred from the argument.
(2) Refutation
Refutation means expressing opinions on certain events and problems, exposing and refuting wrong and reactionary views or propositions.
There are three forms to refute wrong and reactionary arguments:
(1) directly refute each other's arguments. First point out the absurd arguments of the other side, then directly refute them with correct truth and conclusive facts, revealing the contradiction between lies and facts, absurdity and truth. In some articles, it is first proved that the argument opposite to the enemy's argument is correct, thus proving that the enemy's argument is wrong.
2 refute each other's arguments by refuting each other's arguments. Argument is the basis of argument, which proves the argument. Wrong reactionary arguments are often based on wrong arguments. If the argument is refuted, it will be untenable.
(3) refute the other party's argument by refuting the fallacy of the other party's argument process (refuting its argument). Refuting the key issues in his argument also refutes the fallacy.
There are three methods of refuting papers: refuting arguments, refuting arguments and refuting arguments. Counterargument is a higher level than the first two.
Although there are two ways of argumentation and refutation, they are not completely separated. Refutation and establishment are dialectical unity. In argumentative writing, sometimes we have to refute the wrong argument; In refuting an article, it is generally necessary to clarify the correct point of view while refuting the wrong argument. Therefore, argumentation and refutation are often combined in argumentative writing.
The difference between direct refutation and indirect refutation
(1) if the direct argument, it is a direct rebuttal.
(2) If you refute the argument through various arguments, it is an indirect rebuttal.
(3) If the center is demonstrated through argumentation from beginning to end, it is a typical rebuttal, such as Lu Xun's On the Surprise of Friends.