Discussion is to express your views on an event or problem, show your views and attitudes, and prove the correctness of your views with sufficient materials. This expression is widely used in argumentative papers and official documents.

The purpose of the discussion is to explain a point and to convince readers. For an article, discussion can make it clear and profound, with strong philosophical and theoretical depth.

The formation of people's speaking ability is later than that of narrative ability. Talking children can make the simplest narrative, but they can't talk. In the study of writing, there is also the law of "first describing and then discussing". It can be seen that the improvement of discussion ability is relatively difficult than the improvement of narrative ability.

Second, the content of the discussion

There are three elements in the discussion: argument, argument and argument. In official documents, these three elements are generally complete.

(1) argument

Argument is the author's views, opinions and attitudes towards the things or problems discussed. Relative to the material (the argument in the argument), the argument occupies a dominant position and is the object proved by the argument.

Arguments are divided into central arguments and sub-arguments. The central argument is the theme of argumentative writing, and the sub-argument is the central meaning at all levels, which is the paragraph theme of all natural paragraphs. Between the central argument and the sub-argument, there is a relationship between outline and purpose. Sub-arguments are subordinate arguments and subordinate arguments of the central argument, and each sub-argument proves the central argument from different angles.

The arguments in official documents are completely different from the themes or meanings in literary works. The theme or implication in literary works is not directly expressed, but the arguments in official documents should be clearly expressed. The theme or implication in literary works is sometimes conveyed unconsciously by the author and grasped intuitively by the author. The arguments in official documents are the author's conscious rational cognition.

(2) arguments

Argument is the basis used to prove the argument, that is, the materials used in the discussion. If there are only arguments without arguments, it is an incomplete discussion. Without the proof and support of arguments, arguments cannot be established and readers cannot be convinced. Therefore, argument is the basis of discussion.

Arguments are divided into factual arguments and theoretical arguments. Factual arguments refer to people, events, statistical data, etc. Theoretical arguments refer to axioms, formulas, proverbs and idioms, famous sayings, etc. These have been introduced in the chapter "Materials".

(3) Demonstration

Argumentation is the method and process of proving an argument with arguments. Simply put, an argument is to prove an argument effectively with arguments, or to reveal the logical connection between arguments.

In a complete discussion process, argument is the core and the object of argument and argument proof; Argumentation is the foundation to solve the problem of what to prove; Argumentation is a bridge between argument and argument, which realizes the whole process of proof.

Argumentation is very important because it does not automatically prove arguments, and only by revealing internal logical connections can the relationship between them be truly established. Argumentative writing is very skillful, and there are some basic methods that need to be mastered through learning.

Third, the basic methods of argument

(A) the basic method of argument

A discussion to establish a correct view is called a debate. Commonly used demonstration methods are:

1. Example method

Example method is a method to prove an argument by enumerating facts. Because people believe the facts in front of them most, there is a saying that "facts speak louder than words", so this is the most acceptable and convincing method for readers, and it is also the most used argument method in discussion.

Step 2 introduce the method

Citation is an argument method used in applying theoretical argument. Most of the quotations are recognized truths, famous sayings and epigrams, which are authoritative and therefore persuasive. We often quote the classic quotations of Marxism-Leninism, the famous sayings of Confucius, Mencius, Laozi and Zhuangzi and western philosophers in argumentative essays, all of which belong to this argumentative method.

3. Contrast method

Contrast method is to compare and contrast two sides of two things with opposite characteristics or one thing with absolutely different characteristics, with the aim of making those different properties and characteristics more distinct and prominent. The application of contrast in official document writing is helpful to affirm the advanced, deny the backward, carry forward the achievements and correct the mistakes.

4. Simulation method

Analogy and contrast are both comparative methods, but their characteristics are quite different. Analogy is to compare things with similar properties and characteristics together, so as to achieve the purpose of accurately understanding things. In official document writing, the method of comparing some units and enterprises with similar scale and conditions is widely used.

5. Causal reasoning method

Causal reasoning is a method to deduce the result from the cause and vice versa. Some reasons will inevitably lead to some results, and after some results appear, it is not difficult for us to deduce the reasons.

(B) the basic method of rebuttal

An argument that refutes a wrong view is called refutation. The methods mentioned above for making arguments can also be used to refute arguments. In addition, refutation also has its own methods. This is closely related to the discussion of three elements, namely:

1. Refute the argument

Is to use the above method to directly prove that the refuted argument is wrong. When refuting arguments, concrete methods such as examples, quotations and causal inference are often used.

Refute an argument

Don't directly refute the other party's argument, but point out that the argument on which the other party's argument is based is unreliable. The argument cannot be established, and the argument it supports is naturally self-defeating.

Step 3 refute the argument

This method does not directly refute the argument, but looks for logical loopholes in the other party's argument, thus pointing out that the other party's reasoning cannot be established. For example, pointing out that the other party's concept is unclear, stealing concepts, contradicting themselves and so on. There is something wrong with the other party's argument, and the conclusion is of course unreliable, so as to refute the other party's argument.