|
1. 定義術語 「你這是什麼意思？」 規則：大多數辯論失敗，是因為人們對定義意見不一。 例子：有人說「自由」時，可能指政治自由，而另一個人則指經濟自由。若不先定義，就會雞同鴨講。
|
1. Define Terms "What do you mean by that?" Rule: Most debates fail because people disagree on definitions. Example: One person may mean “political freedom” while another means “economic freedom.” Without definitions, they talk past each other.
|
|
2. 質疑假設 「你為什麼相信這個？」 規則：每個主張都隱含著假設。揭露它們，就能顯示該觀點的優缺點。 例子：當有人說「考試分數能衡量一個人的能力」，假設就是「能力=分數」。
|
2. Question Assumptions "Why do you believe this?" Rule: Every claim carries hidden assumptions. Exposing them reveals strengths and weaknesses. Example: Saying “test scores measure a person’s ability” assumes that “ability = scores.”
|
|
3. 要求證據 「你能舉個例子嗎？」 規則：事實和例子會將模糊的觀點轉化為扎實的知識。 例子：如果有人說「運動有益健康」，證據可能是研究顯示每天快走能降低心血管疾病風險。
|
3. Demand Evidence "Can you give an example?" Rule: Facts and examples turn vague opinions into solid knowledge. Example: If someone says “exercise is healthy,” evidence might be research showing daily walking lowers heart disease risk.
|
|
4. 測試後果 「如果我們按此採取行動，會發生什麼？」 規則：強有力的想法經得起現實檢驗。這個問題能揭示潛藏的弱點。 例子：一家公司若決定完全自動化，要思考的後果是「員工會失業嗎？」
|
4. Test Consequences "What will happen if we act on this?" Rule: Strong ideas withstand real-world testing. This question reveals hidden flaws. Example: If a company fully automates, the consequence might be “Will employees lose their jobs?”
|
|
5. 發現矛盾 「這與其他事實相衝突嗎？」 規則：矛盾表示推理哪裡斷裂，或數據需要重新解釋。 例子：若有人說「所有人都是自私的」，但同時又舉例母親犧牲自己照顧孩子，就出現矛盾。
|
5. Spot Contradictions "Does this conflict with other facts?" Rule: Contradictions show where reasoning breaks or data needs reinterpretation. Example: If someone says “everyone is selfish,” but also gives the example of a mother sacrificing for her child, that’s a contradiction.
|
|
6. 懷疑顯而易見的事情 「如果這不是真的呢？」 規則：最危險的信念，是那些看似毫無疑問的觀念。應對其提出質疑。 例子：很多人相信「錢一定能帶來幸福」，但若質疑這點，就能探討幸福的其他來源。
|
6. Doubt the Obvious "What if this isn’t true?" Rule: The most dangerous beliefs are those considered unquestionable. Subject them to doubt. Example: Many believe “money always brings happiness.” Questioning this opens discussion about other sources of happiness.
|
|
7. 考慮替代方案 「相反的觀點會怎麼說？」 規則：審視其他觀點，可以避免盲點並改善決策。 例子：當有人說「網路只帶來壞影響」，替代觀點可能是「網路也能促進教育和知識共享」。
|
7. Consider Alternatives "What would the opposite view say?" Rule: Examining alternative perspectives helps avoid blind spots and improves decisions. Example: If someone says “the internet only has bad effects,” an alternative view is “it also promotes education and knowledge sharing.”
|