(2) Deductive argumentation, also known as "theoretical argumentation", is a method to demonstrate individual cases according to general principles or conclusions. That is, to prove particularity with the argument of universality.
For example, movement is the movement of matter, and matter is the moving matter.
(3) Analogical demonstration is a method to deduce examples of similar things from known things, that is, from special to special demonstration methods.
(4) Causal argument, which proves the argument by analyzing things and revealing the causal relationship between arguments and arguments.
First of all, analogy is the explanation method, and the one on the second floor is wrong.
There are three ways to discuss in junior high school:
Putting facts to reason is putting facts to reason.
Placing facts is an example argument, and reasoning is a reason argument.
There is no figurative figure of speech at the beginning of the article, so how to prove this with metaphor?
The beginning of the article is to reason with you and put forward the author's point of view The following discussion makes the argument more powerful with examples.
Metaphorical argument, to put it bluntly, is actually a rhetorical device used in the text. As an argument method, it is called metaphorical argument. The function is to make the content of the argument more vivid and more conducive to readers' understanding.
These are some conceptual problems, and if you think more, you will be solved.
2. Ways and means of argumentative writing in classical Chinese What are the methods of argumentative writing? Argument and rebuttal.
Argumentation methods include: example argument, truth argument, contrast argument, metaphor argument and quotation argument.
1. Demonstration with examples: cite conclusive, sufficient and representative examples to prove the argument;
2. Reasoning and argumentation: use the incisive opinions in the classic works of Marxism-Leninism, epigrams of famous people at home and abroad, and recognized theorem formulas to prove the argument;
3. Comparative argument: compare the positive and negative arguments or arguments, and prove the arguments in comparison;
4. Metaphorical argument: use familiar things as metaphors to prove the argument. In addition, the refutation methods of "spear belt, shield belt attack" and "reduction to absurdity" are often used in refutation. It is often used comprehensively in most argumentative papers.
5. Citation arguments: Citation arguments are complex and related to the specific cited materials, including quotes, aphorisms, authoritative data, anecdotes of celebrities, jokes, etc., and their functions should be analyzed in detail. For example, quoting famous sayings, aphorisms and authoritative data can enhance the persuasiveness and authority of the argument; Citing celebrity anecdotes and anecdotes can enhance the interest of the argument and attract readers to read.
3. The argumentation method of ancient prose:
1, deductive argument;
2. Inductive demonstration (example demonstration);
3. Comparative argumentation (analogical argumentation, comparative argumentation);
4. Metaphorical argument.
Difference:
1. Deductive argument is a method from general to individual. It deduces conclusions about individual situations from general principles, and the relationship between its premise and conclusions is necessary.
There are many forms of deduction, such as syllogism, hypothetical reasoning and selective reasoning, but the most important one is syllogism. Syllogism consists of three parts: major premise, minor premise and conclusion. Such as the major premise that all metals can conduct electricity, iron is the minor premise of metals, and iron can conduct electricity.
2. Inductive argument is an argument method from individual to general. It draws a general conclusion through many individual examples or arguments, and then summarizes their characteristics.
Induction can give examples before drawing a conclusion, or it can put forward a conclusion and prove it with examples. The former is what we usually call induction, and the latter is what we call example. Example method is an argument method to prove the argument with individual and typical concrete examples.
3. Comparative argument is an argument method from individual to individual. Usually divided into two categories: one is analogy and the other is comparison.
4. Metaphor argument is to use metaphor as an argument and analogy to demonstrate analogy (topic). In the figurative argument, the figurative person is a set of vivid examples, which contain certain relations and truths, while the figurative person is an abstract truth.
Although the figurative person and the figurative person are two different things, there is a general principle of * * * between them, so there is a reasoning relationship between them. Metaphorical argument is a way to demonstrate fables (topics) with fables as arguments.
Extended data:
Factual argumentation uses true, reliable and representative examples to prove the argument, specifically and forcefully prove the central argument, enhance the persuasiveness, interest and authority of the article, and make the article easy to understand.
Reasoning can enhance the persuasiveness or literary talent of the article and make the argument more powerful or attractive.
The contrast between right and wrong is clear and impressive, which makes the argument more powerful or attractive.
Metaphorical reasoning is easy to understand, vivid and easily accepted.
Baidu Encyclopedia-Overview
4. Classical argumentation method 1: inductive argumentation (example argumentation) 2: deductive argumentation 3: comparative argumentation (analogy argumentation, contrast argumentation) 4: figurative argumentation 1: inductive argumentation (example argumentation) inductive argumentation is a kind of argumentation method from individual to general.
It draws a general conclusion through many individual examples or arguments, and then summarizes their characteristics. Induction can give examples before drawing a conclusion, or it can put forward a conclusion and prove it with examples.
The former is what we usually call induction, and the latter is what we call example. Example method is an argument method to prove the argument with individual and typical concrete examples.
2. Deductive argumentation Deductive argumentation is a method of argumentation from general to individual. It deduces conclusions about individual situations from general principles, and the relationship between its premise and conclusions is necessary.
There are many forms of deduction, such as syllogism, hypothetical reasoning and selective reasoning, but the most important one is syllogism. Syllogism consists of three parts: major premise, minor premise and conclusion.
Such as the major premise that all metals can conduct electricity, iron is the minor premise of metals, and iron can conduct electricity. 3. Comparative argument (analogy argument, comparative argument) Comparative argument is an argument method from individual to individual.
Usually divided into two categories: one is analogy and the other is comparison. 1, analogy.
Analogy argument is based on the similarity or similarity of two objects in some attributes, and infers that they are similar or similar in other attributes. Its logical form is: A has the attributes of A, B, C and D, and B has the attributes of A, B and C, so B may have the attribute of D, which belongs to inductive reasoning in formal logic. Analogical reasoning belongs to probabilistic reasoning, which is a reasoning mode from special to special and from individual to individual. Its conclusion is not necessarily true, but reliable to some extent.
In some cases, it is sometimes impossible to obtain more accurate arguments. It is sometimes effective to prove by analogy.
Analogy is enlightening, making it easy for readers to understand abstract truth and making the article concise and vivid. When using this method, it should be noted that analogy objects should have the same or similar attributes to prevent mechanical analogy.
Because the premise of analogy is something special, and the conclusion of analogy reasoning is probable, it will not be enough to discuss complex problems only through analogy reasoning. Analogy has a certain philosophical basis because the world is diverse and unified.
Judging from the way of thinking, analogy argument is not limited to the superficial differences of things. It tries to find common ground in differences by connecting different things, thus involving dialectical factors, which has its significance in the process of understanding the objective world. Although many analogies are not necessarily valid, they can be used as assumptions for further research. However, as a way of argument, because it is a kind of probabilistic reasoning, its conclusion is not completely reliable, so it is often expressed as "possible"; In addition, even the basically correct analogy conclusion contains some fallacies.
Generally speaking, the reliability of analogical reasoning depends on the relationship between the attributes owned by * * * and the derived attributes. If the attribute of * * * is closely related to the derived attribute, the reliability of the conclusion will be greater; If the degree of connection is low, the reliability of the conclusion is low; If it's irrelevant, you can't make an analogy.
Pay attention to the following points when using analogy: (1) Use similar objects for analogy. There are infinitely many things in the world that have some identical or similar properties, and some of them are completely irrelevant. Comparing them is unconvincing.
(2) Avoid using analogy alone to demonstrate a way of argument. It is best to combine it with other argumentation methods to make it play a supplementary and rich role.
(3) Pay attention to the reliability of the conclusion. Unless there are certain circumstances, the conclusion is generally only a possibility.
In terms of expression, we should grasp the discretion and not be absolute. 2. Comparative demonstration.
Contrastive argument is a different way of thinking, which focuses on revealing the essence of the argument that needs to be demonstrated from the contrast of opposite or different attributes of things. The reason why comparative argument is widely used is that there are many things that can be compared, such as Chinese and foreign, ancient and modern, size, strength and so on. , are suitable for comparison. After analyzing and clarifying the difference between the two, it is obvious that the argument can be established naturally.
Contrast can be a comparison between two objects or a comparison of the same object at different stages. The former is called horizontal comparison and the latter is called vertical comparison. Using the method of vertical comparison, we can't stay at the static judgment level of formal logic, otherwise, it will sometimes appear unconvincing.
Several problems should be paid attention to when using comparative argument: First, the two sides of comparison should be comparable. Second, we should establish a reasonable frame of reference.
To compare, we must have a reasonable * * * frame of reference. Without a * * * frame of reference, the two cannot be compared. The so-called reference refers to the standards used to measure and determine the advantages and disadvantages of both parties. Such standards must be objective, otherwise the conclusion of comparison may not be reliable.
4. Metaphorical argumentation Metaphorical argumentation is to demonstrate with metaphor and to demonstrate the truth of analogy with people (topics). In the figurative argument, the figurative person is a set of vivid examples, which contain certain relations and truths, while the figurative person is an abstract truth.
Although the figurative person and the figurative person are two different things, there is a general principle of * * * between them, so there is a reasoning relationship between them. Metaphorical argument is a way to demonstrate fables (topics) with fables as arguments.
When using metaphors, we should pay attention to several issues: First, the things used as metaphors should be familiar, specific and simple, so as to explain another thing in a popular and vivid way. Second, the metaphor should be appropriate and natural, and it should be able to properly explain the characteristics of the things being demonstrated.
Teachers can be compared to candles and silkworms, which shows that they have given everything selflessly, but they can't be compared to keeping others clean, but like increasingly dirty rags and brooms. This metaphor is called "the loss of metaphorical meaning". Thirdly, any metaphor is flawed because of the lack of essential internal relations between the two sides of metaphor.
To discuss a problem completely and profoundly, we should not only rely on a few metaphors, but also combine examples.
5. There are four methods and functions of five arguments.
Common argumentation methods and their functions;
1. Demonstration with examples: demonstrate with concrete examples to make the demonstration more concrete and convincing.
Answer format: adopt the method of argument, and ... (summarize examples) prove ... (If there is a sub-argument, write the sub-argument it proves, otherwise write the central argument), so as to make the argument more specific and convincing.
2. Reasoning and argumentation: prove the argument through reasoning, making the argument more general and profound.
Answer format: Use the method of rational argument to demonstrate the viewpoint of …, so as to make the argument more general and profound.
Note: if you quote famous sayings, aphorisms and authoritative data, you can enhance the persuasiveness and authority of the argument; Citing celebrity anecdotes and anecdotes can enhance the interest of the argument and attract readers to read.
Answer form: adopt the argument method of quoting arguments, and the viewpoint … or more interesting, to attract readers to continue reading.
3. Comparative demonstration. The function is to highlight.
Answer format: compare … with … by means of comparative argument, and highlight the viewpoint of ….
4. Metaphorical argument: truth is easy to be understood and accepted. Make the argument more vivid and more conducive to readers' understanding.
Answer format: using the method of metaphorical argument, compare.
6. What are the best methods for Chinese argumentative writing? Write out the functions of various argumentation methods and illustrate them with examples. ① Demonstration with examples: cite conclusive, sufficient and representative examples to prove the argument; (2) Reasoning: use the incisive opinions in the classic works of Marxism-Leninism, famous sayings and aphorisms from domestic and foreign celebrities, and accepted theorem formulas to prove the argument; ③ Comparative argument: compare positive and negative arguments or arguments, and prove arguments in comparison; 4 Metaphorical argument: use familiar things as metaphors to prove the argument. In addition, in refutation, the refutation methods of "attacking your shield with your spear" and "reducing to absurdity" are often used comprehensively in most argumentative papers. ⑤ Inductive argument is also called "factual argument". This is a method of citing concrete examples to demonstrate general conclusions. ⑤ Deductive argument is also called "theoretical argument". It is a method to demonstrate a case according to general principles or conclusions, that is, to prove the particularity with universal arguments. ⑦ Analogy is a method to deduce examples of similar things from known things, that is, from special to special. (8) Causal argument, which proves an argument by analyzing things and revealing the causal relationship between arguments and arguments. Causality argument can use both causal evidence and causal evidence. You can also prove each other's cause and effect. 9. Citation argument: a kind of "reasoning argument", in which famous sayings are cited as arguments to analyze problems and explain reasons. There are two ways to quote: one is to explicitly quote, indicating who said the quoted words or the source; The other is implicit reference, that is, it does not indicate who said the quoted words or its source.
7. Advantages of various argumentation methods The argumentation methods include ① Example argumentation: list conclusive, sufficient and representative examples to prove the argument.
(2) Arguments: famous sayings and aphorisms of celebrities at all times and at all times, as well as recognized theorems and formulas. To prove this argument. (3) Comparative argument: compare the positive and negative arguments or arguments, and prove the arguments in comparison.
(4) Metaphorical argument: use familiar things as metaphors to prove the argument. In addition, the refutation methods of "spear belt, shield belt attack" and "reduction to absurdity" are often used in refutation.
It is often used comprehensively in most argumentative papers. ⑤ Inductive argument is also called "factual argument".
Give concrete examples to demonstrate the method of general conclusion. ⑥ Deductive argument, also known as "theoretical argument", is a method to demonstrate individual cases according to general principles or conclusions, that is, to prove special arguments with general arguments.
⑦ Analogical demonstration is a method to deduce examples of similar things from known things, that is, from general to special demonstration methods. (8) Causal argument, which proves the argument by analyzing things and revealing the causal relationship between arguments and arguments.
Causality argument can be proved by causality, effect and causality. Citation argument: a kind of "reasoning argument", which takes famous sayings as arguments, quotes classics, analyzes problems and explains reasons.
There are two ways to quote: one is to explicitly quote and explain who said the quoted words or their sources, and the other is to implicitly quote, that is, not to explain who said the quoted words or their sources.
8. China's classical horse theory used several argumentation methods 1. Metaphorical demonstration: this paper takes horses as metaphors to talk about talents, swift horses as metaphors for talents, Bole as metaphors for people who know talents, and horse eaters as metaphors for fatuous rulers. Starting with the relationship between Maxima and Bole, this paper clearly puts forward that "there is Bole in the world, and then there is Maxima", and then explains with the unfortunate experience of famous horses that there is Maxima without Bole or it is equal to no Maxima. The improper method of feeding horses further proves this argument. Without Bole, there would be no swift horse. Finally, the performance of those people who don't know horses is powerfully summarized with parallelism sentences, which comes down to a key point, that is, they don't know horses in essence. If you don't know a horse, say there is no horse. If you know a horse, there is a horse.
2. Fact demonstration: Describe the experience of Maxima through image thinking, and present facts to show whether Maxima exists without Bole.
3. Reduction to absurdity: Except the first sentence of the article, which puts forward the argument from the front, other viewpoints are discussed from the opposite side, and the argument that "there is Bole in the world, and then there is a swift horse" is demonstrated by counterexamples.