How to criticize in a kind way: intelligent rules dispute
Relations / / December 19, 2019
Daniel Dennett (Daniel Dennett), famous American philosopher, described the simple steps that will make any criticism useful, constructive and compassionate.
Martin Arthur (Arthur Martin), author of the legendary set of rules of behavior for the aristocracy, wrote: "The purpose of scientific or moral and ethical debate to be true, rather than a desire to defeat the enemy."
Therefore, do not stay confused, lose a bet: after you get new knowledge.
Of course, in most cases, all very different. Online dispute, as well as a real skirmish, may take place in different ways. But the largest number of peremptory statements still pronounced because of the reliable and secure keyboard shield.
This form of "criticism", which is actually better described as fault-finding, rather than a constructive response, well described Mark Twain. People acting in this manner, he bestowed a kind of metaphor. Critics writer suggested compare with beetle dung: "symbol critics should choose beetle dung; it lays its eggs in a foreign manure, or a bug of not able to sit. "
But it should not be. There is a way to criticize a person and still be compassionate, not wanting to defeat the enemy, and with it come to the truth; not be right at all costs, and to understand and help others understand.
This method is described Daniel Dennett. American scientist Marvin Minsky (Marvin Minsky), a pioneer in the field of artificial intelligence, Dennett has called the best contemporary philosopher Bertrand Russell and the next.
Daniel Dennett studied philosophy consciousness. In particular, it addresses the problem of the discussion and asks: how to be compassionate man when he begins to criticize the views of his opponent?
The answer to the identified problems will be "the best vaccination against the tendency to karikaturirovaniyu enemy," says Dennett. As an antidote to this it offers a set of four rules. The basis for the work of the philosopher took another professor - Anatoly Rapoport, the author of the decision "prisoner's dilemma". He presented the best strategy for the classic problem of game theory.
"Prisoner's dilemma" says that the players will not always cooperate with each other, even if cooperation is playing into the hands of everyone.
Daniel Dennett, who tried to find the answer to your question, synthesized the decision based on the work of Anatoly Rapoport. As a result, he presented four simple steps that will make the criticism constructive, compassionate and honest.
- Retell the position of your opponent in your own words without distorting the facts, that the other person said, "Thank you, I should have worded it that way."
- List all points at which you agreed, especially if it is not well-known facts.
- Tell us what you learned through your opponent.
- And only then begin a rebuttal and criticism of what has been said by your interlocutor.
All of the above would be true for the comments, posted on the Internet. And this is not utopian thinking and cunning move. Dennett believes that such an approach to criticism is able to transform your worst enemy in a grateful and receptive listener. And this, in turn, plays into the hands of you and provides control over the course of the discussion.