20xxted英語演講辯論一定要分出勝負(fù)(編輯修改稿)
2025-01-16 23:10 本頁面
【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 going to work. So we have these models argument as war,argument as proof, and argument as performance.
但是我們還應(yīng)該注意到其實還有第三種方式,我認(rèn)為它非常有效，它就是表演式辯論，如同在觀眾面前辯論。我們可以想想一個政客想要競選一個職位，或嘗試去讓他的觀眾接受他的政見。但是我認(rèn)為對這個模式的一個曲解有必要指出，亦即當(dāng)我們在觀眾面前辯論時，有些時候觀眾在辯論中起了更重要的參與作用，我們的如同面對了一群陪審團(tuán)，他們判斷是非，裁定訴案。讓我們稱之為修辭模式，這種模式下你就要像裁縫一樣為觀眾量身定制一場辯論。你要一場聽上去激烈討論，嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)論證的英語辯論，而聽眾是一群法國人，那就是白費力氣。你看我們有這么多辯論模式戰(zhàn)爭式辯論，論證式辯論，表演式辯論。
Of those three, the argument as war is the dominant dominates how we talk about arguments, it dominates how we think aboutarguments, and because of that, it shapes how we argue, our actual conduct inarguments.
在這三種模式中，戰(zhàn)爭式辯論占了主導(dǎo)。它使每當(dāng)我們提起辯論，就是這種模式。這種模式基本代表了我們對辯論的理解，也因此，它影響了我們辯論的方式，我們在辯論時的表現(xiàn)。
Now, when we talk about arguments, yeah, we talk in avery militaristic language. We want strong arguments, arguments that have a lotof punch, arguments that are right on want to have our defenses upand our strategies all in order. We want killer amp。39。s the kind ofargument we want. It is the dominant way of thinking about Iamp。39。mtalking about arguments, thatamp。39。s probably what you thought of, the adversarialmodel. But the war metaphor, the war paradigm or model for thinking aboutarguments, has, I think, deforming effects on how we argue.
如今當(dāng)我們談起辯論，我們就會進(jìn)入一種軍國主義的論調(diào)。我們需要具有攻擊性的辯論，辯論時就如同給對手的臉上來上幾拳，最好每個論點都直擊要害。我們想把自己武裝起來,組織好策略去應(yīng)對。我們想要擊敗對手。那就是我們想要的辯論。這就是一種主流的辯論觀。當(dāng)我說到辯論的時候，很可能你馬上想到的就是敵對模式。戰(zhàn)爭模式這個比方，或者說是對辯論模式的認(rèn)知，在我看來正在削弱我們的辯論。
First it elevates tactics over substance. You can take aclass in logic, argumentation. You learn all about the subterfuges that peopleuse to try and win arguments, the false steps. It magnifies the usversusthemaspect of it. It makes it adversarial. Itamp。39。s polarizing. And the onlyforeseeable outes are triumph, glorious triumph, or abject, ignominiousdefeat. I think those are deforming effects, and worst of all, it seems toprevent things like negotiationor deliberation or promise or about that one. Have you ever entered an argument thinking, amp。quot。Letamp。39。ssee if we can hash something out rather than fight it out. What can we work outtogether?amp。quot。 And I think the argumentaswar metaphor inhibits those otherkinds of resolutions to argumentation. And finally, this is really the worstthing, arguments donamp。39。t seem to get us anywhere. Theyamp。39。re dead ends. They areroundabouts or traffic jams or gridlock in conversation. We donamp。39。t get anywhere.
首先它使辯論的技巧凌駕與觀點本身。你可以去上關(guān)于邏輯與辯論的課程。你可以學(xué)到所有人們在辯論中可以使用的詭計以力求去贏得一場辯論，多么愚蠢的方式啊。這放大了辯論中我們與他們的對立關(guān)系。這使辯論變得敵對。如同以偏振鏡來看問題。而唯一可預(yù)見的結(jié)果就是
范文總結(jié)相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號-1