Refuting the Six-layer Pyramid: How to Express Objection

It is not easy to clearly distinguish personal attacks and insults. The concept of "personal attacks" here may be different from what people usually understand, and it refers more to the words that are directly directed at the other party in the debate than their opinions.

Considering that Huang bar owners has many enemies, many people may instinctively say "What's there to say with such people" when they see this ID, which is actually a personal attack in this article. Because it has nothing to do with Huang bar owners's views and contents, but directly denies this person, the "name calling" we often say almost belongs to this category. This kind of behavior is obviously unconvincing. For example, a mental patient said, "This year is 213." If you directly deny his argument just because he is a mental patient, then you are wrong.

one more thing, questioning the qualifications and professional level of the other party also belongs to this level. For example, many people who have bled in Tachibana Risa might refute Huang bar owners: "How many Tachibana Risa films have you seen? Don't talk nonsense if you don't understand! " You know, experts make mistakes, and no matter how hard you slap Tachibana Risa, you can't even know how many hairs she has. We often say "first impression", which shows that looking at a cover is enough to judge the appearance of a actress, even if there are many cover killers.

Level 2: Oppose the author's expression

In fact, to be fair, it is not easy to reach this level. First of all, you have to be cultured, don't spray people, and contain the anger in your chest; Secondly, you have to have a certain cultural literacy, mainly the sensitivity to language.

For example, "How deadly is it that you smear oranges by any means?"

We can clearly see that this reply has made a lot of progress than the first two levels, at least touching the content of the post, rather than circling around the person who posted it. If the author is the owner of the post, at least because the other party read my post and was moved, so as to have the motivation to further reply to the discussion.

Unfortunately, there is a saying that "words are rough but not rough", and everyone has special writing habits and expressions. If you just make a fuss about it, you might as well have two writing classes at school. You know, words are only carriers, and thoughts and opinions are the most important.

the third level: point out that the author contradicts himself

In fact, to be honest, there is no need to write it down here, because in most cases, the debate on the Internet has no chance to go to this level. If reaching the second level requires mentality and literary accomplishment, then reaching this level requires logic and speculative ability. Sadly, our ancestors were not good at this, and most of the popular debate stories in the pre-Qin period were actually just sophistry. Because the author is not good at debating, and the skill of classical Chinese is limited, I won't discuss it in depth here, so as not to make people laugh.

the fourth level: giving arguments

the third level is mainly to make a fuss about the inside of the other party's words, and the further approach is to collect arguments that can support you from the outside. For example, Huang Weibing mentioned Tachibana Risa's plastic surgery and breast augmentation in the original text. If you can collect the evidence that Tachibana Risa's face and chest are all natural, you can effectively attack this article.

Now is the era of information explosion. Although the network has provided convenience for us to collect information, it is not easy to get rid of the false and keep the false. For example, many people will quote Baidu Encyclopedia to save trouble, but is Baidu Encyclopedia really reliable? People who have studied academic writing should know that both Baidu Encyclopedia and Wikipedia are essentially the contents edited by netizens themselves, and it will make a joke if they are quoted in the paper.

Therefore, giving arguments is not as simple as it seems. What arguments to find and where to find them are all knowledge.

Level 5: Refutation

There are many overlaps between the fourth level and the fifth level. The former focuses on finding fault, while the latter focuses on expressing one's own views on the basis of refutation, so-called breaking first and then standing.

For example, the author said, "All you have to do is collect evidence to prove that Tachibana Risa's popularity does not depend entirely on her status as AKB48". But the difficulty is that it can't be analyzed quantitatively like natural science. You can't control the variable and get rid of the influence of the variable AKB48.

or, if the author says "discredit AKB48", you need to prove that Tachibana Risa has not tarnished AKB48' s reputation, but may add luster to AKB48. Of course, this also requires a lot of investigation and research, and also has certain requirements for the reliability of information sources. The size of survey samples and the choice of objects must be paid attention to.

the sixth level: hitting the central argument

has finally reached the final stage, and the power of this level is to fundamentally deny the other party's central argument. Huang Weibing said, "How shameless is a woman like Tachibana Risa?" In order to counter the central argument, you need to prove that Tachibana Risa is not shameless, and then give sufficient and reliable arguments. However, because the central argument is relatively large, which generally contains many sub-arguments, the workload that follows will be very large. If it can be written clearly and logically, it is not much different from a paper.