Writing ideas: 1, column phenomenon; 2. Show shortcomings; 3. Explore the root causes; 4. Point out the direction.
1, column phenomenon
List immoral phenomena in reality that hinder the healthy development of society. The typicality of case selection to alert people; The richness of the list, in order to arouse readers' * * *; The diversity of rhetoric can highlight literary talent and enhance momentum.
Step 2 show shortcomings
Every ugly phenomenon will cause more or less social losses. Some losses are obvious, which makes people despise and spit on; But after a long time, there will be some losses, and many people can't see the harm of this imagination, so it is necessary to reveal it, which requires writers not only to have a profound vision, but also to have the ability to foresee through phenomena.
3. Explore the root causes
From a philosophical point of view and a theoretical point of view, it shows the depth and breadth of thinking.
Step 4 point out the way
Have a long-term vision and strategic vision, and point out a way to solve the problem for readers. From the perspectives of education, government regulation and guidance, and severe punishment by law.
Extended data:
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.