Issue 79 求拍，感觉这篇好难写啊。。

shuaiherowang

Issue79 Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.
Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.

中文提纲
1）能说服持相反观点的人当然好。eg：神创论与进化论关于眼镜的盲点之争
2）但有时由于偏见和误导，有的argument无法说服众人。eg：Nikola Tesla的交流电
3）有时正反双方其实都部分正确，都有重大意义，结合之后就是大突破。eg：波粒二象性
因此，可以说服相反观点的人可以作为一个成功论证的充分条件，而不是必要条件

这篇文章写的严重超时啊，而且感觉好难下手，也不知道举的例子是否合适，烦请各位大神指点，谢谢！

I agree with the statement that an argument is of herculean strength if its holder can successfully convince his opponents. But this doesn’t consequentially mean that an argument which fails to eliminate its opposing viewpoint is definitely of inferior ability. In contrast, the situation sometimes is so complex that the true value of an argument cannot be accurately assessed merely based on its cogency.

No doubt having a debate with opponents can supply one an opportunity to test his argument’s ability and to identify some weak points of one’s own theory, based on which one can improve the theory and make it more convincing. For example, there used to be a debate between evolution and creationism whose topic had an association with blind spot in human eye. The human eye, from the creationism’s viewpoint, is so sophisticated that it must be made by the mighty God. However, evolutionists stick to their theory and ultimately found that there existed a blind spot in human eye which would be impossible if the human eye was God’s grace (since God won’t create anything with flaw). Through the debate, evolutionists successfully excluded one counterexample from their opponents and demonstrated the strength of their idea.

However, some arguments are still of great value even they cannot convincing others. There are many reasons for this situation, including the nature of the argument, the cognitive bias of the public, the misleading guide from the authority, and so forth. One case in point has an association with Nikola Tesla, founder of alternating current electrical supply system. His “heretic” pronouncements earned him a reputation as “mad scientist”; the traditional fear of alternating current created the public bias; the fact that the industry of alternating current would compete with the industry of direct current made many authorities of direct current area—including Edison—opposed his work openly. All this added to his failure to convince the public that the alternating current was safe and of great potential. But was his argument wrong or of little value? Absolutely not.

Sometimes, the situation is even more compounding—that both sides of the debate are partially right and therefore neither of them can convince each other. Even so, the argument of both sides can still be of groundbreaking importance. In fact, such situation is not uncommon, for one common pattern of human cognition is from part to whole. The creation of wave-particle duality theory is a good example. In the 17th century, competing theories of light were proposed by Huygens and Newton: light was thought to either consist of waves (Huygens) or of particles (Newton). It is precisely because that both sides offered irrefutable evidence that some later scientists began to hypothesize that all particles also have a wave nature and vice versa and finally proved their hypothesis. Therefore, the argument of both sides, though failed to exclude opposing viewpoint, is of groundbreaking importance.

Given this analysis above, the ability to convince dissenter can serve as a sufficient condition for the argument’s cogency, rather than a necessary condition. Because of the various situations, to get a proper assessment of an argument, we must make a concrete analysis of concrete conditions.

527字

竹林中人

你的提纲很好，想说的是如果一个viewpoint在一段时间内能hold很多人，但其实它是诡辩，只是一时没人能反驳而已，那么这又怎么办。
语言和内容也很好，继续努力

lmylacoste

写得非常好！！！