Name: 格雷厄姆的分歧層次理論 (Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement)
Uploaded: 2025-08-02T18:24:16.000Z
Duration: 7 min 48 s

After hearing them, let us know if you agree or disagree and why.

聽完之後，請告訴我們您是同意還是不同意以及原因。

Abortion is legal because babies can't vote.

墮胎是合法的，因為嬰兒不能投票。

No woman can call herself free who does not control her own body.

不能控制自己身體的女性不能稱之為自由女性。

Race and skin color are socially constructed, not biologically natural.

種族和膚色是社會構建的，而不是生物自然形成的。

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.

如果說自由意味著什麼，那就是有權告訴人們他們不想聽的話。

And finally, we are educators and the world ain't round.

最後，我們是教育工作者，世界不是圓的。

To optimize for learning and retention, pause the video, write how you agree or disagree in the comments below, and then continue.

為了優化學習和記憶，請暫停視頻，在下面的評論中寫下您的同意或不同意，然後繼續。

When you discuss a topic and everyone agrees, the conversation often dies out quickly.

當你討論一個話題，每個人都同意時，話題往往很快就結束了。

But when you disagree, you're putting yourself in opposition to what was said.

但是，當你不同意時，你就把自己放在了與所說內容相對立的位置上。

This can bring the discussion to a level where everyone involved learns more about the issue.

這可以將討論帶入一個層次，讓參與討論的每個人都能對問題有更多瞭解。

If we are going to disagree, we should be careful to do it well.

如果我們要提出不同意見，我們就應該小心謹慎地做好這件事。

In 2008, Paul Graham attempted to answer this question by proposing a hierarchy with seven stages of disagreement, ranging from weak to strong.

2008 年，保羅-格雷厄姆（Paul Graham）試圖回答這個問題，他提出了一個由弱到強的七個階段的分歧等級體系。

The lowest level is name-calling, which attacks the person and not what they say.

最低級的是謾罵，攻擊的是人而不是人說的話。

If Bob and Jen say, we are educators and the world ain't round, you may answer, you are idiots.

如果鮑勃和珍說，我們是教育工作者，世界不是圓的，你們可以回答，你們是白痴。

Second is the ad hominem attack, which questions the authority of someone without addressing the argument.

第二種是主觀攻擊，即質疑某人的權威，而不涉及論點。

If they say, we are educators and the world ain't round, you can respond, you may be educators, but you certainly aren't scientists.

如果他們說，我們是教育工作者，世界不是圓的，你們可以回答說，你們可能是教育工作者，但你們肯定不是科學家。

Like name-calling, it's a weak form of disagreement as it attacks them, but not what they say.

就像罵人一樣，這是一種軟弱的分歧形式，因為它攻擊的是他們，而不是他們說的話。

Third is responding to tone, meaning to criticize the style of language rather than its content.

三是迴應語氣，即責備語言風格而非內容。

If they say, we are educators and the world ain't round, you can reply, ain't is bad English.

如果他們說 "我們是教育工作者，世界不是圓的"，你可以回答說 "不是 "是糟糕的英語。

It is a weak form of disagreement as you object to the tone and not the content.

你反對的是語氣，而不是內容，是以這是一種軟弱無力的異議。

Now we get responses to what was said rather than by whom or how.

現在，我們得到的迴應是說了什麼，而不是由誰或如何說的。

If they say, we are educators and the world ain't round, you can retort, it is round.

如果他們說，我們是教育工作者，世界不是圓的，你可以反駁說，世界是圓的。

Contradiction can have weight because sometimes seeing the opposing case stated explicitly is enough to get the point across.

自相矛盾也有一定的分量，因為有時看到對方明確陳述理由，就足以讓人明白這一點。

The counter-argument is a contradiction with reasoning and the first form of convincing disagreement.

反駁是以理服人的矛盾，也是令人信服的分歧的第一種形式。

If they say, we are educators and the world ain't round, you can answer, I'm a scientist and it isn't flat either.

如果他們說，我們是教育家，世界不是圓的，你可以回答，我是科學家，世界也不是平的。

In fact, from space, it looks pretty round.

事實上，從太空中看，它看起來非常圓。

When aimed squarely at the original argument, it can be convincing.

如果直指原論點，就會令人信服。

But often, two people who are arguing passionately about something are actually talking about two different things.

但通常情況下，兩個人對某件事情爭論得面紅耳赤，其實說的是兩碼事。

The refutation is quoting someone and explaining why they are mistaken.

反駁就是引用某人的話，解釋他們為什麼錯了。

If they say, we are educators and the world ain't round, you may respond, when you say that you are an educator and the world ain't round, you actually imply that you have authority and that the world is flat.

如果他們說，我們是教育工作者，世界不是圓的，你可以回答說，當你說你是教育工作者，世界不是圓的，你實際上暗示你有權威，世界是平的。

Videos from space are proof it's pretty round.

來自太空的視頻證明它是圓的。

這是一種令人信服的分歧形式。

It's also a rare form because it's more work.

這也是一種罕見的形式，因為它的工作量更大。

Refuting the central point is the most powerful form of disagreement.

反駁中心觀點是最有力的分歧形式。

Prior to this level, you have been unclear or, in the worst case, deliberately dishonest.

在這一級別之前，你一直不清楚，或者在最壞的情況下，故意不誠實。

If they say, we are educators and the world ain't round, you can refute the central point as such.

如果他們說，我們是教育者，世界不是圓的，你可以反駁他們的中心觀點。

Your statement that the Earth is not round is technically right, the Earth being closer to an ellipsoid.

你說地球不是圓的，這在技術上是對的，地球更接近於橢圓體。

But by only sharing what the Earth is not, without adding any clarification, you lead people to believe whatever fits best with their own convictions, provided it is not that the Earth is round.

但是，如果你只告訴人們地球不是什麼，而不做任何澄清，你就會引導人們相信任何最符合他們自己信念的東西，只要它不是地球是圓的。

Assuming educators are meant to help people understand better, this is in direct contradiction with the idea of you being an educator and thus makes your statement an oxymoron.

假設教育者的目的是幫助人們更好地理解，這與你是教育者的想法直接矛盾，是以你的說法是矛盾的。

Graham stated that there are three main benefits of knowing forms of disagreement.

格雷厄姆指出，瞭解分歧的形式有三大好處。

It helps us to evaluate what we read, see and hear.

它可以幫助我們對所讀、所見和所聞進行評估。

In particular, it helps us spot intellectually dishonest arguments from speakers who use words eloquently.

特別是，它可以幫助我們從那些用詞雄辯的演講者那裡發現智力上不誠實的論點。

It makes conversations richer because participants focus on the actual point.

它使對話內容更加豐富，因為參與者會把注意力集中在實際問題上。

Lower levels of disagreement attack the person which is mean.

分歧程度較低的人則會攻擊刻薄的人。

Higher levels of disagreement attack the idea which is easier to accept and dissimilate.

不同意見較多的人攻擊更容易接受和吸收的觀點。

Most people don't really enjoy being obnoxious.

大多數人其實並不喜歡討人厭。

They sometimes are because they haven't found a better way to express themselves.

他們有時是因為沒有找到更好的方式來表達自己。

If moving up the disagreement hierarchy makes people less mean, it will probably make many of them happier too.

如果分歧等級的提升能讓人們不再那麼刻薄，那麼很多人可能也會是以而更加快樂。

你同意還是不同意格雷厄姆的觀點？

If you don't feel strongly about this topic, you'll probably disagree with one of the other four statements we made at the beginning.

如果你對這個話題沒有強烈的感覺，那麼你可能會不同意我們在開頭提出的其他四種說法中的一種。

Let us know how you disagree with them in the comments below.

請在下面的評論中提出您的不同意見。

Race and skin colour are socially constructed, not biologically natural.

This and all other Sprouts videos are licensed under Creative Commons.

本視頻及其他所有 Sprouts 視頻均採用知識共享許可協議進行許可。

That means teachers from all around the world can use them in classrooms, online courses or to start projects.

這意味著世界各地的教師都可以在課堂、在線課程或啟動項目中使用它們。

And today, thousands already do.   To learn how it works and download this video without ads or background music, check out our website or read the description below.

今天，已經有成千上萬的人這樣做了。   要了解其工作原理並下載這段無廣告或背景音樂的視頻，請訪問我們的網站或閱讀下面的說明。

If you want to support our mission and help change education, visit our Patreon.

如果您想支持我們的使命並幫助改變教育，請訪問我們的 Patreon。

字幕列表影片播放

格雷厄姆的分歧層次理論 (Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement)

assume

content

quote

properly