1. Argument methods in ancient Chinese
Argument methods in ancient Chinese:
1. Deductive argument;
2. Inductive argument (examples) Argument);
3. Comparative argument (analogy argument, contrastive argument);
4. Metaphorical argument.
Differences:
1. Deductive argument is a method of argumentation from general to specific. It proceeds from general principles to derive conclusions about individual cases, and the connection between the premises and the conclusion is necessary.
Deduction has many forms, such as syllogism, hypothetical reasoning, disjunctive reasoning, etc., but the most important one is syllogism. A syllogism consists of three parts: major premise, minor premise and conclusion. For example, the major premise "all metals can conduct electricity", the minor premise "iron is a metal", and the conclusion "so iron can conduct electricity".
2. Inductive argumentation is a method of argumentation from individual to general. It uses many individual examples or sub-arguments, and then summarizes their unique characteristics to draw a general conclusion.
In the induction method, you can first give examples and then draw conclusions, or you can first put forward conclusions and then prove them with examples. The former is what we usually call the induction method, and the latter is what we call the illustration method. The illustration method is an argumentation method that uses individual and typical concrete examples to prove the argument.
3. Comparative argumentation is a method of argumentation from individual to individual. It is usually divided into two categories: one is the analogy method and the other is the contrast method.
4. Metaphorical argumentation is to use metaphors as arguments, using the metaphorical person’s principles to demonstrate the metaphorical person’s (topic) principles. In metaphorical arguments, the metaphorizer is a set of image examples, which contain certain relationships and truths, while the metaphoree is an abstract truth.
Although the metaphorical person and the metaphorical person are two different types of things, there is a same general principle between them, so there is an inferential relationship between them. Metaphorical argument is an argument method that uses the metaphorical person as an argument to prove the metaphorical person (topic).
Extended information:
Factual argumentation uses real, reliable and representative examples to prove the argument, concretely and powerfully prove the central argument, and enhance the persuasiveness, interest and authority of the article. , making the article easy to understand.
Logical arguments can enhance the persuasiveness or literary grace of an article, making the argument more powerful or attractive.
Comparative arguments make the right and wrong clear and the merits clear, which is impressive and makes the argument more powerful or attractive.
Metaphors and arguments are easy to understand, and the language is vivid and vivid, making it easy for people to accept.
Baidu Encyclopedia - Overview 2. What are the methods of discussion and argumentation in classical Chinese?
Argumentation methods include: argumentation and refutation
Argumentation methods include: examples Argument, logical argument, comparative argument, metaphorical argument, citation argument
1. Demonstration with examples: List conclusive, sufficient and representative examples to prove the argument;
2. Logical argument: Use incisive insights from Marxist-Leninist classics, famous aphorisms from ancient and modern Chinese and foreign celebrities, and recognized theorems and formulas to prove arguments;
3. Comparative argument: Compare the positive and negative arguments or arguments. , prove the argument through comparison;
4. Metaphorical argument: Use familiar things as metaphors to prove the argument. In addition, in the refutation, the refutation method of "using Zi's spear and attacking Zi's shield" and "reductio ad absurdum" are often used. It is often used comprehensively in most argumentative papers.
5. Citation argument: Citation argument is more complicated, which is related to the specific citation materials. There are various situations such as quoting famous quotes, aphorisms, authoritative data, anecdotes of celebrities, jokes and anecdotes. Its function is to Specific analysis. For example, quoting celebrity quotes, aphorisms, and authoritative data can enhance the persuasiveness and authority of the argument; quoting celebrity anecdotes and anecdotes can enhance the interest of the argument and attract readers to read on. 3. Argument methods in ancient texts
1: Inductive argument (argument by illustration) 2: Deductive argument 3: Comparative argument (argument by analogy, comparative argument) 4: Metaphorical argument 1: Inductive argument (argument by illustration) Induction Argument is a method of argumentation from individual to general.
It uses many individual examples or sub-arguments, and then summarizes their unique characteristics to draw a general conclusion. The induction method can first give examples and then draw conclusions, or it can first put forward conclusions and then prove them with examples.
The former is what we usually call the induction method, and the latter is what we call the illustration method. The illustration method is an argumentation method that uses individual and typical concrete examples to prove the argument.
2: Deductive argument Deductive argument is a method of argumentation from general to specific. It proceeds from general principles to derive conclusions about individual cases, and the connection between the premises and the conclusion is necessary.
Deduction has many forms, such as syllogism, hypothetical reasoning, disjunctive reasoning, etc., but the most important one is syllogism. A syllogism consists of three parts: major premise, minor premise and conclusion.
For example, the major premise "all metals can conduct electricity", the minor premise "iron is a metal", and the conclusion "so iron can conduct electricity". 3: Comparative argument (analogy argument, contrastive argument theory) Comparative argument is a method of argumentation from individual to individual.
It is usually divided into two categories: one is the analogy method and the other is the contrast method. 1. Argument by analogy.
The analogy argument is based on the similarity or similarity between two objects in certain attributes, and infers that the two objects are also the same or similar in other attributes. Its logical form is: A has a, b, c, d attributes, B has the attributes of a, b, and c, so B may have the attributes of d, which belongs to inductive reasoning in formal logic. Argument by analogy is a type of probabilistic reasoning, which is a way of reasoning from particular to particular, from individual to individual. Its conclusion may not necessarily be true, but only has a certain degree of reliability.
In some cases, more precise arguments are sometimes not available. Using analogies to argue is sometimes effective.
The analogy method is enlightening. It explains the profound things in simple terms, making it easy for readers to understand abstract principles and making the article concise and vivid. When using this method, it should be noted that the analog objects should have the same or similar attributes to prevent the problems of mechanical analogy.
Since the premise used for analogy is a special thing, the conclusion of analogical reasoning is probable. When discussing complex issues, it will be insufficient to use analogy to reason. The analogy argument has a certain philosophical basis, because the world is diverse yet unified.
From the perspective of the way of thinking, analogy argumentation is not limited to the superficial differences of things, but connects different things to examine, and attempts to seek common ground in differences. It contains elements of dialectics and plays a vital role in understanding the objective world. The process has its own significance. Although the conclusions of many analogies are not necessarily true, they can be used as hypotheses for further research. However, as a method of argumentation, since it is a kind of probabilistic reasoning, its conclusion is not completely reliable, so "possible" is often used in expressions; in addition, even a basically correct analogy conclusion also contains certain fallacies. .
Generally speaking, the reliability of analogical reasoning depends on the connection between the actual attributes and the inferred attributes. If there is a close connection between ***'s attributes and the inferred attributes, the reliability of the conclusion will be greater; if the connection is low, the reliability of the conclusion will be low; if they are irrelevant, the analogy cannot be made.
When using analogy arguments, you should pay attention to the following points: (1) Use similar objects for analogy. There are infinitely many things in the world that have the same or similar attributes, and some are simply unrelated. Analogies between them are unconvincing.
(2) Avoid using analogy as an argument alone. It is best to use it in conjunction with other argumentative methods to supplement and enrich it.
(3) Pay attention to the reliability of the conclusion. Unless certain circumstances are certain, the conclusion is generally just a possibility.
Be careful in your expression and do not make it absolute. 2. Comparative argument.
Contrastive argument is a way of thinking that seeks differentiation, which focuses on revealing the essence of the argument that needs to be demonstrated through the comparison of opposite or different attributes of things. The comparative argument method has a wide range of application, because there are many things that can be compared, such as China and foreign countries, ancient and modern, large and small, strong and weak, etc., which are all suitable for comparison. In the comparison, the differences between the two are analyzed and clarified. After the differences can be opposed, right and wrong are clear, and the argument can naturally be established.
Comparison can be a comparison between two objects, or a comparison between different stages before and after the same object itself. The former is called a horizontal comparison, and the latter is called a vertical comparison. The argumentation method using vertical comparison cannot stay at the level of static judgment of formal logic, otherwise, it sometimes appears not convincing enough.
There are several issues to pay attention to when using comparative arguments: First, the two sides of the comparison must be comparable. Second, a reasonable frame of reference must be established.
To make a comparison, you must have a reasonably identical frame of reference. Without a identical frame of reference, the two cannot be compared. The so-called reference system refers to the standard used to measure and determine the merits and demerits of both parties. Such standards must be objective, otherwise the conclusion of the comparison may not be reliable.
4: Metaphorical argument Metaphorical argument is to use metaphors as arguments, using the metaphorical person’s principles to demonstrate the metaphorical person’s (topic) principles. In metaphorical arguments, the metaphorizer is a set of image examples, which contain certain relationships and truths, while the metaphoree is an abstract truth.
Although the metaphorical person and the metaphorical person are two different types of things, there is a same general principle between them, so there is an inferential relationship between them. Metaphorical argument is an argument method that uses the metaphorical person as an argument to prove the metaphorical person (topic).
There are several issues that need to be paid attention to when using metaphors for argumentation: First, the things used as metaphors should be familiar, concrete, and simple to everyone, so that they can explain another topic both popularly and vividly. a thing. Second, the metaphor should be appropriate and natural, and should be able to properly explain the characteristics of the thing being demonstrated.
Teachers can be compared to candles and spring silkworms, indicating that they selflessly give everything they have, but they cannot be compared to people who can make others clean, but they themselves are like increasingly dirty rags. Broom, this use of metaphor is called "metaphorical nonsense". Third, any metaphor is flawed because the two sides of the metaphor lack essential internal connections.
To fully and profoundly discuss an issue, we cannot rely on just a few metaphors, but should combine them with examples. 4. The argumentation methods in classical Chinese include induction, deduction and comparison (also divided into analogy and contrast
(1) Induction: This is a method of argumentation from the individual to the general. It is divided into complete Induction and incomplete induction. Generally, incomplete induction is used, and complete induction is rarely used, such as in the article "Carrying forward the great entrepreneurial spirit". The induction method can be divided into two types according to the order of examples: first, examples, and then induction. Draw conclusions and then give examples. The latter is called "exemplification method" (2) Deductive method: This is a method of argumentation from general to specific. In terms of form, it has the following types: Syllogism, hypothetical reasoning, disjunctive reasoning, etc. are mainly syllogisms. A syllogism is an evolutionary deductive reasoning that derives a conclusion from two premises connected with the same concept. It consists of three parts: a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. , The minor premise can sometimes be one item.
(3) Comparison method: This is a method of argumentation from individual to individual. It is usually divided into two categories, one is the analogy method and the other is the contrast method. . The former compares different things with the same or similar properties and characteristics in some aspects, and then draws conclusions, such as "On "Fairy Play" should be slowed down". The latter uses the properties and characteristics to be opposite or opposite in some aspects. Comparison between different things to prove the argument, such as "Theory of Clique"
I hope it can help you 5. What are the methods of language argumentation? ① Demonstration with examples: List conclusive and sufficient examples. , representative examples are used to prove the argument;
②Principal argumentation: Use incisive insights from Marxist-Leninist classics, famous sayings of ancient and modern Chinese and foreign celebrities, and generally recognized theorems and formulas to prove the argument;
③ Comparative argument: compare the positive and negative arguments or arguments, and prove the argument through comparison;
④ Metaphorical argument: use familiar things as metaphors to prove the argument. In refuting, the refuting method of "using your spear to attack your shield" and the "reduction method" are often used comprehensively in most argumentative papers.
⑤ Inductive argument. It is also called "factual argument". It is a method of demonstrating general conclusions by citing specific examples. ⑥ Deductive argument, also called "theoretical argument", is to demonstrate individual cases based on general principles or conclusions. method.
That is, using universal arguments to prove particular arguments.
⑦ Argument by analogy is a method of deducing examples of similar things from known things, that is, an argument method from special to special.
⑧Causal argument, which proves the argument by analyzing the facts and revealing the causal relationship between the argument and the argument. Causal arguments can use cause to prove effect, or effect to prove cause, or cause and effect to prove each other.
⑨ Quotation argument: A type of "principal argumentation", which uses quotes from famous people as arguments, and uses classics to analyze problems and explain the truth. There are two methods of quoting: one is explicit quoting, which means who said the quoted words or the source, and the other is implicit quoting, which does not explain who said the quoted words or their source. 6. There is more than one correct answer to a thing. Read the answer. The thinking mode of "there is only one correct answer" is
①However, seeking the second answer, or other paths and new methods to solve the problem, depends on Creative thinking. So, what are the necessary elements for creative thinking? ② Someone answered like this: "Creative people always work tirelessly to acquire knowledge and make themselves knowledgeable. From ancient history to modern technology, from mathematics to flower arrangement, nothing will be achieved if you are not proficient in all kinds of knowledge. Because this knowledge may be lost at any time Make combinations to form new ideas. This situation may occur six minutes later, six months later, or six years later. But the person involved firmly believes that it will definitely appear." ③ I completely agree with this. Knowledge is the key to forming new ideas. The material of creativity. But this does not mean that you can be creative with knowledge alone. The real key to creativity lies in how to use knowledge. Creative thinking must have the attitude and consciousness of exploring new things and utilizing knowledge for this purpose. , on this basis, various attempts have been made persistently. ④The typical representative in this regard is John Guttenberg. He combined two originally unrelated machines-a grape press and a coin punch. , developed a new product. Because the grape press is used to squeeze juice from grapes, it applies force equally over a large area. The function of the coin punch is to print stamps on small surfaces such as gold coins. . One day, Guttenberg asked himself, only half jokingly: "Could it be possible to add the pressure of a grape press to a few coin strikers and make them print stamps on paper?" By This invented the printing press and typesetting. ⑤ Another example is Roland Bushener. One day in 1971, Bushener thought while watching TV: "It is too boring to just watch. Use the TV receiver as an experiment Object and see what reaction it produces." Shortly thereafter, he invented the interactive table tennis video game and began the game console revolution. 1. What is the main issue discussed in the excerpt? 2. What does “this situation” in paragraph 2 refer to? 3. What are the main argument methods used in this passage? 4. What issues does the author think need to be paid attention to when using creativity and knowledge? 2010-12-31 11:25 I am in the third grade of junior high school, too, but we learn faster than you. We have already given the answer to this question. 1. What is the real key to creativity? (Or "What are the necessary elements for creative thinking?") 2. Refers to "knowledge can be combined at any time to form new ideas." 3. Demonstration with examples and reasoning 4. ① Absorb knowledge tirelessly, Make yourself knowledgeable ② Have the attitude and awareness to explore new things and utilize knowledge for this purpose. On this basis, persevere in various attempts. P.S: ①LZ, please note that the most important thing for doing this kind of reading question is to find out what is in the text. The most important thing when looking for answers and reviewing questions, as well as argumentative essays like this in class, is to take careful notes in class. In the formal examination, you cannot lose a single point for expository essays and argumentative essays. In addition, keep in mind the argument. The name and definition of the method are also required.