🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🎤 *Introduction and Purpose of the Book* - Introduction to the event and guest speaker, Bo Seo. - Bo Seo's background and his motivation to write the book. - Purpose of the book: "The Art of Disagreeing Well" as a toolkit for enhancing debating skills. 05:11 🌐 *Arguing as a Skill and Responsibility* - Arguing is a skill that can be developed, not just a natural occurrence. - Disagreeing is a craft, work, and an art that requires attention and improvement. - Bo Seo emphasizes the responsibility of individuals, especially those in influential positions, to set examples for healthy public conversations. 11:38 🤝 *Naming Disagreements and Establishing Rules* - Every disagreement should start with an agreement about the rules of the conversation. - Naming the disagreement is crucial to understand the core issues beneath the surface. - Illustration using a parenting example: "Should we send our kids to the local public school?" - exploring the underlying disagreements within this seemingly simple question. 19:36 🧠 *Resolving Disagreements by Addressing Fundamental Issues* - Naming and addressing disagreements within disagreements help avoid misunderstandings. - Resolving fundamental disputes can lead to the resolution of superficial disagreements. - Focusing on the core issues ensures a more effective and constructive resolution of conflicts. Made with HARPA AI
WTF. Where is the rest of this discussion: I wanted to learn to debate. Here is a question? Should this content be free or should we pay for it? My first point would be (if I was actually communicating with someone): if I was paying, where is the money going? Is it to an organisation like CNN or is the money going into, say, furthering education for disadvantaged kids. If the latter, paying, say a few quid to develop debating skills and knowing the money is also going to helping people communicate better while advancing knowledge of the world is a good cause. If not, then where is it going? Possibly someone who believes that economic growth should be considered more important than making a more equal society. Then I disagree, as this goes against furthering the education for a more stable society. They may argue, well, economic growth has pulled lots of people out of poverty. I would say, that is correct on a material level which is likely to have other benefits for individuals and perhaps the wider society. On the other hand, is this sustainable and is the growth leading to a happier society. Then I would present my argument that it is not sustainable because of pollution and finite resources, alongside evidence that society is facing increases in the prevalence of mental illness (less happiness). To oppose this argument, they could argue that technology is producing more effective ways of being resourceful and therefore pollution and waste can be eliminated through innovation by companies, which is in their interest to sustain profits. Plus the taxation from growth helps to pay for healthcare and profits mean private companies can pay for staff welfare as it should be in the companies interest. Plus, they may argue that happiness is hard to measure and therefore how do we know for sure that the societies of the world are becoming unhappier? To this I'd say there is plenty of evidence, such as breakdowns, drug use and people who watch too much CNN, which have been found to be strongly linked to inequality, whether material, social, psychological or spiritual. Then I have won the argument, but the world is not ideal and are there alternatives for organising societies. Then another debate can begin.
Sorry I forgot the last point before moving onto to alternative democratic societies: Then it is established that the money is paid in order to make profit rather than furthering more collective social interests. Then should I pay. This depends on affordability and value for money. Okay, let say it is affordable and value for money comes in imagining other ways of running a society. That's a good enough reason even if it is done in the name of personal profit. Or is it? Then I need convincing that it will be a broad and interesting discussion that seeks solutions to existential threats to life. He will introduce and panel and each will have an input about debating complex issues that threaten the system in which CNN operates under. These are trusted and renowned researchers providing a wide spectrum of positions all seeking a better world and therefore CNN recognises views opposed to their political positions and economic interests. I am convinced it is worth paying.
It took way too long to write my answer. Plus, we didn't come to the issue of whether technology can accommodate for finite resources and the destruction occurring through the obsession with economic growth. I have also just remembered that I am not actually debating with another person, just imaginary person from CNN or somewhere.
@@wilfredsterling2124 I can deduce that you hold a grudge against CNN. It's best to just leave it alone and move on. You need to write a book brother. Can you send me a link to where you generate those impressive ideas? I want to become smarter.
Jesus love you, he died on the cross for you, accept him as your lord and savior he can change everything. For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life" (John 3:16) But you must repent too. From that time Jesus went about preaching and saying, Let your hearts be turned from sin, for the kingdom of heaven is near. (Matthew 4:17):
Like a champion? Do you mean like Donald Trump just did against Biden, as has been widely acclaimed all across mainstream media? However, I didn't see any of you debate leaders, coaches, judges, as experts on any of the analysis shows.
@@egalauch9193 Yall will make excuses instead of challenging him to do better. If you’re giving a presentation, including debates, avoid the use of “ummm”.
Debate contests are like amusement parks - they can be fun and exciting, but they don't have much bearing on real life. Winning a debate contest doesn't guarantee success in the real world, which is far more complex and unpredictable. While debate skills are valuable, real-life success depends on many other factors. So enjoy the ride, but don't mistake it for the destination. That's why Bo Seo wins at the contest but he is not a successful politician or businessman.
perhaps you are mistaken in the way you view success, he is at the beginning of his career, from which he might not even want to be a bussinesman or politician. Being a 2-time world champion brought him succes as well, it is the reason he has the ethos to make a book about arguments, which is pretty successful, but the contests in and of themselves are sport. They are sport but they help you navigate, analyze, improvise and put your thoughts into speech, instead of gaining muscles.
To say you can’t use these skills would assume they don’t work. Have you used them? Maybe you’re not using them properly because from where I’m standing they’re perfectly fine. It’s disappointing to see someone have so much opinion about a subject, yet no ability to share a solution thats useful within relationships, no? 🤷🏻♀️
@@smalltv459 I'd say he's hiding his power level (he has other tricks up his sleeve) beause real word debates and arguments are much more Machiavellian and dark. for example look at real politician's debate vs a debate contest. debate contests create a sterile environment where judgment is passed by a referee. I'm just saying that it doesn't represent real life. you need to take on a more cunning route to be successful in business. think of it like kung-fu vs street fight.
I mean, hes not a politician or a businessman anyway, hes a journalist :/ also, the difference between these debate competitions and political debate is that, for business debates youre essentially needed to have absolute loyalty to the house youre siding with and that those types of debates are on very high basis of technical laws and the likes. But, the debate tips bo gave is actually more towards general, everyday debate or engagement between 2 people. Its like how a debater whos been trained to specially train in debates regarding businesses maybe if they were the representatives of their companies' speakers, differ from debaters whos been trained to win these contests. Same thing with karate master and underground street fighters, both are still applicable in real life fights, just in different context, but ultimately, theyre still successful i guess
@@14MCDLXXXVIII88 Losing debates to reinforce peoples misinformation is a useful Machiavellian trick. I like watching people who are morons win debates by appealing to other idiots only to get them to screw up their job or promises because what they believe is stupid and just doesn't work when they act on it. Then the other idiots turn on them. No one learns and a new idiot is held on a pedestal to replace the old. Repeat the process. Key is to profit from the conflict. Winning debates using tactics that are inherently stupid can make you into an arrogant idiot.
One of the ways in which I waste time (or try to be useful) is compiling lists of collocations. I attach below an entry in my database. Feel free to share it with friends and foes. Of course, you can also edit the list. argument [310+ collocations for 'argument'] [Many of the collocations here can also be found in "Dictionary of Appropriate Adjectives" by E. H. Mikhail (2015). Sadly, they are not in alphabetical order there.] academic ~ acrimonious ~ ad hominem ~ ad nauseam ~ admissible ~ aforementioned ~ age-old ~ "is a disagreement or debate that has been going on for a very long time." amateurish ~ amateurishly-presented ~ amazing ~ amazingly [simple/elegant/etc,] ~ ampliative ~ "is an argument that is deductively invalid, meaning that its conclusion contains information that is not present in its premises." anfractuous ~ "is one that's characterized by windings and turnings.." archaic ~ articulate ~ avalanche of ~s "... bury your opponent in an avalanche of arguments" balanced ~ banal ~ basic ~ bilious ~ boring ~ brainless ~ bread-and-butter ~ ceaseless ~(s) childish ~ choice ~ clear ~ clearly [articulated/...] ~ closing ~ cogent ~ coherent ~ comical ~ compelling ~ complicated ~ conclusive ~ concise ~ constructive ~ contentious ~ convincing ~ cosmological ~ credible ~ crowd-pleasing ~ cumulative ~ [most/strangely/suicidally*/uncommonly/unexpectedly*/...] daring ~ debatable ~ debunked ~ deceptive ~ deceptively [simple/...] ~ "A deceptively simple argument is a seemingly straightforward argument that may have hidden assumptions or flaws." decisive ~ demagogic ~ "... making a demagogic argument more palatable" demonstrative ~ disallowed ~ disputable ~ disruptive ~ dissuasive ~ "is an argument that identifies a way to prevent an undesirable outcome." distasteful ~ distracting ~ "is a type of logical fallacy called a red herring, which is a misleading argument that attempts to divert attention away from the main topic." divisive ~ domestic ~ double-edged ~ dubious ~ dummy ~ elaborate ~ elegant ~ emotional ~ endless ~ evidence-based ~ exceptionally [well-written /sophisticated/ ...] ~ exciting ~ extremist ~ fake ~ fallacious ~ false ~ familiar ~ feeble ~ ferocious ~ "... a ferocious argument among a motley cast of characters" fierce ~ fiery ~ flimsy ~ forceful ~ forcefully delivered ~ "... the gaps and prejudices within the forcefully delivered argument" forcible ~ friendly ~ frivolous ~ funny ~ furious ~ futile ~ hackneyed ~ hair-splitting ~ half-baked ~ "... dismissing the lawyer's half-baked argument..." hard-nosed ~ heated ~ [see also: red-hot ~] heretical ~ high-minded ~ ill-constructed ~ ill-timed ~ illogical ~ impassioned ~ impeachable ~ “inappropriate but not impeachable” argument implausible ~ important ~ impregnable ~ impressive ~ impromptu ~ improvised ~ inarticulate ~ incisive ~ incoherent ~ inconclusive ~ inconsequential ~ inconsistent ~ incredible ~ indefensible ~ indisputable ~ indubitable ~ (weak) inductive ~ "is an argument where the conclusion is unlikely to be true, even if the premises are true." ineffective ~ influential ~ insidious ~ insignificant ~ insincere ~ insolent ~ insoluble ~ intangible ~ intemperate ~ intense ~ interminable ~ intractable ~ intriguing ~ invalid ~ invalidated ~ invulnerable ~ irrational ~ irrefutable ~ irresistible ~ irrelevant ~ [typicall] knee-jerk ~ "is an impulsive, hasty, or irrational response that is often based on preconceived notions." legitimate ~ limp ~ limpid ~ logical ~ long ~ long-distance ~ long-forgotten ~ long-form ~ "is an extended argument that's more structurally complex than other arguments." long-overdue ~ long-standing ~ long-winded ~ loose ~ loud ~ make-or-break ~ masterful ~ meaningful ~ meaningless ~ memorable ~ "Most world-class orators understand the importance of rhythm and cadence in creating memorable argument[s]." memorized ~ meretricious ~ "is a plausible but false or insincere argument." metaphysical ~ mighty ~ mild ~ modern ~ moral ~ naïve ~ nasty ~ nebulous ~ nonsensical ~ novel ~ no-win ~ obsolete ~ oft-repeated ~ "The evidence flying in the face of that oft-repeated "argument" is..." ontological ~ oppositional ~ original ~ outdated ~ overdone ~ overused ~ [more] palatable ~ passionate ~ parroted ~ pedantic ~ penetrating ~ perceptive ~ perennial ~ persuasive ~ philosophical ~ plausible ~ point-counterpoint ~ pointless ~ potent ~ powerful ~ practical ~ pragmatic ~ precise ~ "is an argument that identifies the best arguments and emphasizes them." preferred ~ [structure] premises of an ~ presuppositional ~ "is a line of reasoning that starts with the assumption that certain starting points are true, called presuppositions." prevalent ~ principled ~ prolonged ~ propagandistic ~ protracted ~ provable ~ proven ~ provocative ~ puerile ~ "is an argument that is childish or silly, and may show a lack of maturity or good judgment." rational ~ reasonable ~ recently-penned ~ reckless ~ recurrent ~ "is a disagreement that happens repeatedly" red-hot ~ "is an argument characterized by intense passion, excitement, or enthusiasm" refutable ~ religious ~ rowdy ~ scapegoat ~ "is a logical fallacy that involves unfairly blaming a person or group for a problem." scarecrow ~ [= straw man argument] scatter-brained ~ "is an argument that may be disorganized, forgetful, or unfocused." scholarly ~ scholastic ~ scientific ~ seamless ~ senseless ~ series of ~s serious ~ set of ~s shaky ~ shallow ~ shrewd ~ silly ~ simple ~ simplified ~ "... a simplified variant of Gödel's Ontological Argument" simplistic ~ skeptical ~ sly ~ solid ~ sophisticated ~ sound ~ specious ~ speculative ~ spirited ~ spontaneous ~ spurious ~ stereotypical ~ sterile ~ stock ~ "is an argument that is common or ordinary." straightforward ~ strange ~ straw man ~ "is a fallacy that occurs when someone misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack." striking ~ stringent ~ "is an argument where the premises are so tightly drawn that the conclusion is beyond doubt." strong ~ stupid ~ substantive ~ "is an argument that is supported by logic or facts and is considered important, real, or meaningful." subtle ~ succession of ~ supple ~ "... may unpack the dynamics involved in a particular situation." suspect ~ "... might refer to an argument that is incoherent, meaning it uses multiple arguments to make a point that is not logically possible." sustainable ~ tedious ~ teleological ~ telling ~ temperate ~ tempestuous ~ tenuous ~ threadbare ~ tight ~ time-honored ~ timeless ~ timely ~ tiresome ~ torrent of ~ tortuous ~ trenchant ~ tricky ~ tried-and-true ~ trifling ~ twin ~s two-edged ~ typical ~ unanswerable ~ unassailable ~ unavoidable ~ unceasing ~s unconvincing ~ underappreciated ~ "is a point or concept in a discussion that is ignored or not given enough consideration, despite its potential significance." underdetermination ~ "is a philosophical ~ that attempts to show that there is no reason to believe a conclusion because the evidence is underdetermined." underdeveloped ~ unending ~ unfamiliar ~ unflinching ~ unfocused ~ unfortunate ~ unimpeachable ~ unreasonable ~ unseemly ~ unsound ~ unsupported ~ unworthy ~ valid ~ vehement ~ "is a forceful expression of strong feelings or emotions." vicious ~ vicious circle ~ "An argument or definition that begs the question." warm ~ watertight ~ "is a carefully-constructed argument that is so sound that it cannot be faulted." weak ~ weighty ~ well-articulated ~ well-crafted ~ well-knit ~ well-made ~ well-prepared ~ well-reasoned ~ well-researched ~ well-rounded ~ "is a well-researched, well-structured argument that considers multiple points of view and uses a variety of appeals to reason." well-structured ~ wild ~ winning ~ wrangling ~ On 12/21/2024, Google found no results for "suicidally daring argument" or "unexpectedly daring argument". argument by repetition Argument from Contingency burden of proof in an argument Steel Man Technique A technique where the best form of the other side's argument is built and then engaged with. This is "A modern argument is a defeasible passage from premises to a conclusion, meaning that new evidence or contrary arguments can cause the premises to no longer lead to the conclusion." "An argument can be considered uncommonly daring if it is deliberately intended to upset the other party, rather than to educate or convince..." An ineffective argument is one that fails to support its conclusion, or is otherwise flawed. different from the "straw man" technique, where one side creates a caricature of the other side's argument and engages with that. "The oft-repeated argument that every university and every country should have the right to develop its own curricula is only justified if graduates emerge from their courses of study with comparable qualitative levels of training." A point-counterpoint argument is? a structure that involves summarizing an opponent's argument and then refuting it with your own argument.? The opposing positions are called counterarguments. An argument or definition that begs the question. It can also refer to a chain of events where the response to one problem creates a new problem that makes the original problem worse. A sterile argument is a discussion or debate that is unproductive or lacks new ideas, imagination, or energy. ‘tiresome argument‘ refers to a discussion or debate that is exhausting or monotonous, often implying that it is overextended or lacking in excitement or interest.
If people were as reasonable and precise in their communication as Mr Seo, the world would be a much better place.
12:30 is where the lesson begins
Thanks
Thank you ❤
This helped so much, thank you
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🎤 *Introduction and Purpose of the Book*
- Introduction to the event and guest speaker, Bo Seo.
- Bo Seo's background and his motivation to write the book.
- Purpose of the book: "The Art of Disagreeing Well" as a toolkit for enhancing debating skills.
05:11 🌐 *Arguing as a Skill and Responsibility*
- Arguing is a skill that can be developed, not just a natural occurrence.
- Disagreeing is a craft, work, and an art that requires attention and improvement.
- Bo Seo emphasizes the responsibility of individuals, especially those in influential positions, to set examples for healthy public conversations.
11:38 🤝 *Naming Disagreements and Establishing Rules*
- Every disagreement should start with an agreement about the rules of the conversation.
- Naming the disagreement is crucial to understand the core issues beneath the surface.
- Illustration using a parenting example: "Should we send our kids to the local public school?" - exploring the underlying disagreements within this seemingly simple question.
19:36 🧠 *Resolving Disagreements by Addressing Fundamental Issues*
- Naming and addressing disagreements within disagreements help avoid misunderstandings.
- Resolving fundamental disputes can lead to the resolution of superficial disagreements.
- Focusing on the core issues ensures a more effective and constructive resolution of conflicts.
Made with HARPA AI
Bo Seo is a master debater.
1.5 speed, perfect ✅
I’d like to see him debating with Dr. Jordan Peterson.
Jordan Peterson isn’t a professional debater , he’s a teacher
@@bencarr8809 most importantly he sucks at debating, as shown in his debate against zizek
@Ben Carr no he's a psychologist.
Bo would destroy him. Peterson isn't a good debater at all.
@@johngibson4882 sure he’s a psychologist, satisfied?
I like Bo but he keeps saying "Ummm" drives me insane
up until I read your comment I wasn’t even noticing these ummm’s and now all I hear are these ummms … why did you do this?!? 😡😂
Remember english is not his First language😅
WTF. Where is the rest of this discussion: I wanted to learn to debate. Here is a question? Should this content be free or should we pay for it? My first point would be (if I was actually communicating with someone): if I was paying, where is the money going? Is it to an organisation like CNN or is the money going into, say, furthering education for disadvantaged kids. If the latter, paying, say a few quid to develop debating skills and knowing the money is also going to helping people communicate better while advancing knowledge of the world is a good cause. If not, then where is it going? Possibly someone who believes that economic growth should be considered more important than making a more equal society. Then I disagree, as this goes against furthering the education for a more stable society. They may argue, well, economic growth has pulled lots of people out of poverty. I would say, that is correct on a material level which is likely to have other benefits for individuals and perhaps the wider society. On the other hand, is this sustainable and is the growth leading to a happier society. Then I would present my argument that it is not sustainable because of pollution and finite resources, alongside evidence that society is facing increases in the prevalence of mental illness (less happiness). To oppose this argument, they could argue that technology is producing more effective ways of being resourceful and therefore pollution and waste can be eliminated through innovation by companies, which is in their interest to sustain profits. Plus the taxation from growth helps to pay for healthcare and profits mean private companies can pay for staff welfare as it should be in the companies interest. Plus, they may argue that happiness is hard to measure and therefore how do we know for sure that the societies of the world are becoming unhappier? To this I'd say there is plenty of evidence, such as breakdowns, drug use and people who watch too much CNN, which have been found to be strongly linked to inequality, whether material, social, psychological or spiritual. Then I have won the argument, but the world is not ideal and are there alternatives for organising societies. Then another debate can begin.
Sorry I forgot the last point before moving onto to alternative democratic societies: Then it is established that the money is paid in order to make profit rather than furthering more collective social interests. Then should I pay. This depends on affordability and value for money. Okay, let say it is affordable and value for money comes in imagining other ways of running a society. That's a good enough reason even if it is done in the name of personal profit. Or is it? Then I need convincing that it will be a broad and interesting discussion that seeks solutions to existential threats to life. He will introduce and panel and each will have an input about debating complex issues that threaten the system in which CNN operates under. These are trusted and renowned researchers providing a wide spectrum of positions all seeking a better world and therefore CNN recognises views opposed to their political positions and economic interests. I am convinced it is worth paying.
It took way too long to write my answer. Plus, we didn't come to the issue of whether technology can accommodate for finite resources and the destruction occurring through the obsession with economic growth. I have also just remembered that I am not actually debating with another person, just imaginary person from CNN or somewhere.
ua-cam.com/video/Y3txUGIc6Sg/v-deo.html
@@wilfredsterling2124 I can deduce that you hold a grudge against CNN. It's best to just leave it alone and move on. You need to write a book brother. Can you send me a link to where you generate those impressive ideas? I want to become smarter.
Jesus love you, he died on the cross for you, accept him as your lord and savior he can change everything. For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life" (John 3:16)
But you must repent too. From that time Jesus went about preaching and saying, Let your hearts be turned from sin, for the kingdom of heaven is near. (Matthew 4:17):
The child may have an opinion also?
Like a champion? Do you mean like Donald Trump just did against Biden, as has been widely acclaimed all across mainstream media? However, I didn't see any of you debate leaders, coaches, judges, as experts on any of the analysis shows.
In his book he teaches us to avoid using the word “ummm” but here he is constantly using it. Good book Bo, but you must practice what you preach.
He is not debating tho, he is just explaining.
@@egalauch9193 Yall will make excuses instead of challenging him to do better.
If you’re giving a presentation, including debates, avoid the use of “ummm”.
Debate contests are like amusement parks - they can be fun and exciting, but they don't have much bearing on real life. Winning a debate contest doesn't guarantee success in the real world, which is far more complex and unpredictable. While debate skills are valuable, real-life success depends on many other factors. So enjoy the ride, but don't mistake it for the destination. That's why Bo Seo wins at the contest but he is not a successful politician or businessman.
perhaps you are mistaken in the way you view success, he is at the beginning of his career, from which he might not even want to be a bussinesman or politician. Being a 2-time world champion brought him succes as well, it is the reason he has the ethos to make a book about arguments, which is pretty successful, but the contests in and of themselves are sport. They are sport but they help you navigate, analyze, improvise and put your thoughts into speech, instead of gaining muscles.
To say you can’t use these skills would assume they don’t work. Have you used them? Maybe you’re not using them properly because from where I’m standing they’re perfectly fine.
It’s disappointing to see someone have so much opinion about a subject, yet no ability to share a solution thats useful within relationships, no? 🤷🏻♀️
@@smalltv459 I'd say he's hiding his power level (he has other tricks up his sleeve) beause real word debates and arguments are much more Machiavellian and dark. for example look at real politician's debate vs a debate contest. debate contests create a sterile environment where judgment is passed by a referee. I'm just saying that it doesn't represent real life. you need to take on a more cunning route to be successful in business. think of it like kung-fu vs street fight.
I mean, hes not a politician or a businessman anyway, hes a journalist :/ also, the difference between these debate competitions and political debate is that, for business debates youre essentially needed to have absolute loyalty to the house youre siding with and that those types of debates are on very high basis of technical laws and the likes. But, the debate tips bo gave is actually more towards general, everyday debate or engagement between 2 people. Its like how a debater whos been trained to specially train in debates regarding businesses maybe if they were the representatives of their companies' speakers, differ from debaters whos been trained to win these contests. Same thing with karate master and underground street fighters, both are still applicable in real life fights, just in different context, but ultimately, theyre still successful i guess
@@14MCDLXXXVIII88 Losing debates to reinforce peoples misinformation is a useful Machiavellian trick. I like watching people who are morons win debates by appealing to other idiots only to get them to screw up their job or promises because what they believe is stupid and just doesn't work when they act on it. Then the other idiots turn on them. No one learns and a new idiot is held on a pedestal to replace the old. Repeat the process. Key is to profit from the conflict. Winning debates using tactics that are inherently stupid can make you into an arrogant idiot.
:(
One of the ways in which I waste time (or try to be useful) is compiling lists of collocations. I attach below an entry in my database. Feel free to share it with friends and foes. Of course, you can also edit the list.
argument
[310+ collocations for 'argument']
[Many of the collocations here can also be found in "Dictionary of Appropriate Adjectives"
by E. H. Mikhail (2015). Sadly, they are not in alphabetical order there.]
academic ~
acrimonious ~
ad hominem ~
ad nauseam ~
admissible ~
aforementioned ~
age-old ~ "is a disagreement or debate that has been going on for a very long time."
amateurish ~
amateurishly-presented ~
amazing ~
amazingly [simple/elegant/etc,] ~
ampliative ~ "is an argument that is deductively invalid, meaning that its conclusion contains information that is not present in its premises."
anfractuous ~ "is one that's characterized by windings and turnings.."
archaic ~
articulate ~
avalanche of ~s "... bury your opponent in an avalanche of arguments"
balanced ~
banal ~
basic ~
bilious ~
boring ~
brainless ~
bread-and-butter ~
ceaseless ~(s)
childish ~
choice ~
clear ~
clearly [articulated/...] ~
closing ~
cogent ~
coherent ~
comical ~
compelling ~
complicated ~
conclusive ~
concise ~
constructive ~
contentious ~
convincing ~
cosmological ~
credible ~
crowd-pleasing ~
cumulative ~
[most/strangely/suicidally*/uncommonly/unexpectedly*/...] daring ~
debatable ~
debunked ~
deceptive ~
deceptively [simple/...] ~ "A deceptively simple argument is a seemingly straightforward argument that may have hidden assumptions or flaws."
decisive ~
demagogic ~ "... making a demagogic argument more palatable"
demonstrative ~
disallowed ~
disputable ~
disruptive ~
dissuasive ~ "is an argument that identifies a way to prevent an undesirable outcome."
distasteful ~
distracting ~ "is a type of logical fallacy called a red herring, which is a misleading argument that attempts to divert attention away from the main topic."
divisive ~
domestic ~
double-edged ~
dubious ~
dummy ~
elaborate ~
elegant ~
emotional ~
endless ~
evidence-based ~
exceptionally [well-written /sophisticated/ ...] ~
exciting ~
extremist ~
fake ~
fallacious ~
false ~
familiar ~
feeble ~
ferocious ~ "... a ferocious argument among a motley cast of characters"
fierce ~
fiery ~
flimsy ~
forceful ~
forcefully delivered ~ "... the gaps and prejudices within the forcefully delivered argument"
forcible ~
friendly ~
frivolous ~
funny ~
furious ~
futile ~
hackneyed ~
hair-splitting ~
half-baked ~ "... dismissing the lawyer's half-baked argument..."
hard-nosed ~
heated ~ [see also: red-hot ~]
heretical ~
high-minded ~
ill-constructed ~
ill-timed ~
illogical ~
impassioned ~
impeachable ~ “inappropriate but not impeachable” argument
implausible ~
important ~
impregnable ~
impressive ~
impromptu ~
improvised ~
inarticulate ~
incisive ~
incoherent ~
inconclusive ~
inconsequential ~
inconsistent ~
incredible ~
indefensible ~
indisputable ~
indubitable ~
(weak) inductive ~ "is an argument where the conclusion is unlikely to be true, even if the premises are true."
ineffective ~
influential ~
insidious ~
insignificant ~
insincere ~
insolent ~
insoluble ~
intangible ~
intemperate ~
intense ~
interminable ~
intractable ~
intriguing ~
invalid ~
invalidated ~
invulnerable ~
irrational ~
irrefutable ~
irresistible ~
irrelevant ~
[typicall] knee-jerk ~ "is an impulsive, hasty, or irrational response that is often based on preconceived notions."
legitimate ~
limp ~
limpid ~
logical ~
long ~
long-distance ~
long-forgotten ~
long-form ~ "is an extended argument that's more structurally complex than other arguments."
long-overdue ~
long-standing ~
long-winded ~
loose ~
loud ~
make-or-break ~
masterful ~
meaningful ~
meaningless ~
memorable ~ "Most world-class orators understand the importance of rhythm and cadence in creating memorable argument[s]."
memorized ~
meretricious ~ "is a plausible but false or insincere argument."
metaphysical ~
mighty ~
mild ~
modern ~
moral ~
naïve ~
nasty ~
nebulous ~
nonsensical ~
novel ~
no-win ~
obsolete ~
oft-repeated ~ "The evidence flying in the face of that oft-repeated "argument" is..."
ontological ~
oppositional ~
original ~
outdated ~
overdone ~
overused ~
[more] palatable ~
passionate ~
parroted ~
pedantic ~
penetrating ~
perceptive ~
perennial ~
persuasive ~
philosophical ~
plausible ~
point-counterpoint ~
pointless ~
potent ~
powerful ~
practical ~
pragmatic ~
precise ~ "is an argument that identifies the best arguments and emphasizes them."
preferred ~ [structure]
premises of an ~
presuppositional ~ "is a line of reasoning that starts with the assumption that certain starting points are true, called presuppositions."
prevalent ~
principled ~
prolonged ~
propagandistic ~
protracted ~
provable ~
proven ~
provocative ~
puerile ~ "is an argument that is childish or silly, and may show a lack of maturity or good judgment."
rational ~
reasonable ~
recently-penned ~
reckless ~
recurrent ~ "is a disagreement that happens repeatedly"
red-hot ~ "is an argument characterized by intense passion, excitement, or enthusiasm"
refutable ~
religious ~
rowdy ~
scapegoat ~ "is a logical fallacy that involves unfairly blaming a person or group for a problem."
scarecrow ~ [= straw man argument]
scatter-brained ~ "is an argument that may be disorganized, forgetful, or unfocused."
scholarly ~
scholastic ~
scientific ~
seamless ~
senseless ~
series of ~s
serious ~
set of ~s
shaky ~
shallow ~
shrewd ~
silly ~
simple ~
simplified ~ "... a simplified variant of Gödel's Ontological Argument"
simplistic ~
skeptical ~
sly ~
solid ~
sophisticated ~
sound ~
specious ~
speculative ~
spirited ~
spontaneous ~
spurious ~
stereotypical ~
sterile ~
stock ~ "is an argument that is common or ordinary."
straightforward ~
strange ~
straw man ~ "is a fallacy that occurs when someone misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack."
striking ~
stringent ~ "is an argument where the premises are so tightly drawn that the conclusion is beyond doubt."
strong ~
stupid ~
substantive ~ "is an argument that is supported by logic or facts and is considered important, real, or meaningful."
subtle ~
succession of ~
supple ~ "... may unpack the dynamics involved in a particular situation."
suspect ~ "... might refer to an argument that is incoherent, meaning it uses multiple arguments to make a point that is not logically possible."
sustainable ~
tedious ~
teleological ~
telling ~
temperate ~
tempestuous ~
tenuous ~
threadbare ~
tight ~
time-honored ~
timeless ~
timely ~
tiresome ~
torrent of ~
tortuous ~
trenchant ~
tricky ~
tried-and-true ~
trifling ~
twin ~s
two-edged ~
typical ~
unanswerable ~
unassailable ~
unavoidable ~
unceasing ~s
unconvincing ~
underappreciated ~ "is a point or concept in a discussion that is ignored or not given enough consideration, despite its potential significance."
underdetermination ~ "is a philosophical ~ that attempts to show that there is no reason to believe a conclusion because the evidence is underdetermined."
underdeveloped ~
unending ~
unfamiliar ~
unflinching ~
unfocused ~
unfortunate ~
unimpeachable ~
unreasonable ~
unseemly ~
unsound ~
unsupported ~
unworthy ~
valid ~
vehement ~ "is a forceful expression of strong feelings or emotions."
vicious ~
vicious circle ~ "An argument or definition that begs the question."
warm ~
watertight ~ "is a carefully-constructed argument that is so sound that it cannot be faulted."
weak ~
weighty ~
well-articulated ~
well-crafted ~
well-knit ~
well-made ~
well-prepared ~
well-reasoned ~
well-researched ~
well-rounded ~ "is a well-researched, well-structured argument that considers multiple points of view and uses a variety of appeals to reason."
well-structured ~
wild ~
winning ~
wrangling ~
On 12/21/2024, Google found no results for "suicidally daring argument" or "unexpectedly daring argument".
argument by repetition
Argument from Contingency
burden of proof in an argument
Steel Man Technique
A technique where the best form of the other side's argument is built and then engaged with. This is
"A modern argument is a defeasible passage from premises to a conclusion, meaning that new evidence or contrary arguments can cause the premises to no longer lead to the conclusion."
"An argument can be considered uncommonly daring if it is deliberately intended to upset the other party, rather than to educate or convince..."
An ineffective argument is one that fails to support its conclusion, or is otherwise flawed. different from the "straw man" technique, where one side creates a caricature of the other side's argument and engages with that.
"The oft-repeated argument that every university and every country should have the right to develop its own curricula is only justified if graduates emerge from their courses of study with comparable qualitative levels of training."
A point-counterpoint argument is? a structure that involves summarizing an opponent's argument and then refuting it with your own argument.? The opposing positions are called counterarguments.
An argument or definition that begs the question. It can also refer to a chain of events where the response to one problem creates a new problem that makes the original problem worse.
A sterile argument is a discussion or debate that is unproductive or lacks new ideas, imagination, or energy.
‘tiresome argument‘ refers to a discussion or debate that is exhausting or monotonous, often implying that it is overextended or lacking in excitement or interest.