How to criticize kindly: the rules of an intelligent debate

2024 Author: Malcolm Clapton | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 03:44

Daniel Dennett, a renowned American philosopher, has outlined simple steps that will make any criticism helpful, compassionate and constructive.

Arthur Martin, the author of the legendary code of conduct for aristocrats, wrote: "The goal of a scientific or moral-ethical debate should be the truth, not the desire to defeat the enemy."

Therefore, do not be confused by arguing: after all, you are gaining new knowledge.

Of course, in most cases, things are quite different. An online dispute, as well as a real skirmish, can take place in different ways. But the largest number of peremptory statements are still made because of the reliable and safe keyboard shield.

This form of “criticism,” which is actually better called criticism than a constructive response, has been well described by Mark Twain. He rewarded people who act in this way with a kind of metaphor. The writer suggested comparing critics with a dung beetle: “The dung beetle should be chosen as a symbol of critics; he lays his eggs on someone else's manure, otherwise the beetle will not be able to hatch them."

But it doesn't have to be that way. There is a way to criticize a person and at the same time remain merciful, wanting not to defeat the enemy, but to come to the truth with him; not to be right at all costs, but to understand and help others understand.

This method was described by Daniel Dennett. The American scientist Marvin Minsky, a pioneer in the field of artificial intelligence, named Dennett the best modern philosopher and the next Bertrand Russell.

Daniel Dennett is studying philosophy of mind. In particular, he considers the problem of discussion and asks the question: how merciful a person should be when he begins to criticize the views of his opponent?

The answer to this problem will be "the best vaccine against the tendency to caricature the enemy," Dennett said. As such an antidote, he proposes a set of four rules. The philosopher took as a basis the work of another professor - Anatoly Rapoport, the author of the solution to the “prisoner's dilemma”. He presented the best strategy for a classic game theory problem.

The Prisoner's Dilemma suggests that the participants in the game will not always cooperate with each other, even if cooperation plays into everyone's hands.

Daniel Dennett, trying to find an answer to his question, synthesized a solution based on the work of Anatoly Rapoport. As a result, he presented four simple steps that will make criticism constructive, compassionate, and honest.

1. Retell the position of your opponent in your own words, without distorting the facts, so that the interlocutor says: "Thank you, I should have formulated it this way."
2. List all the points at which you have reached agreement, especially if they are not generally known facts.
3. Tell us what you learned from your opponent.
4. And only after that, start refuting and criticizing what your interlocutor said.

All of the above will be true for comments posted on the Internet. And these are not utopian reflections, but a clever move. Dennett believes that this approach to criticism can turn your worst enemy into a grateful and receptive listener. And this, in turn, plays into your hands and provides control over the course of the discussion.