STAR ARMY

Sci-fi roleplaying and worldbuilding community

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
guide:effective_resolution

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
guide:effective_resolution [2018/06/18 15:27] – wesguide:effective_resolution [2019/06/06 15:48] – [Reductio ad absurdum] toshiro
Line 2: Line 2:
 If there is a disagreement with someone over a specific fact or incident, there is not always a clear-cut answer and the other person may not always play by the rules.  None the less, it is important for a number of reasons to stick to the motives and methods outlined below to properly resolve the issue without turning the issue into a toxic one.  The skills used are similar, though their application is very much the same. If there is a disagreement with someone over a specific fact or incident, there is not always a clear-cut answer and the other person may not always play by the rules.  None the less, it is important for a number of reasons to stick to the motives and methods outlined below to properly resolve the issue without turning the issue into a toxic one.  The skills used are similar, though their application is very much the same.
  
-{{stararmy:two_warrant_officers_talking_over_tea_by_angrygrizley.png?300|Resolving conflicts peacefully}}+{{stararmy:2018_two_warrant_officers_talking_over_tea_by_angrygrizley.png?300|Resolving conflicts peacefully}}
  
 ===== Avoid Presumptions ===== ===== Avoid Presumptions =====
Line 88: Line 88:
 ==== Reductio ad absurdum ==== ==== Reductio ad absurdum ====
  
-This is the introduction of an intentional logical fallacy to try and make the other person look ridiculous.  One scenario would be a person who is hesitant to accept the latest changes to the DR system due to a specific concern.  An arguing party might state: "You don't support the newest DR system?  Do you intend to let this sight turn completely lawless?"  Now, the first person quite probably does not subscribe to such an extreme, but none the less is accused of such.  This is meant to make the first person look bad to their peers by the second, even though it has no factual basis.  Sometimes used by politicians against each other, it is an intentional tactic.  If the attempt is perceived for what it is and fails, it may be played off as an attempt at sarcasm.  Please avoid this one, as it is one of the dirtiest tricks in the book.+This is the introduction of an intentional logical fallacy to try and make the other person look ridiculous.  One scenario would be a person who is hesitant to accept the latest changes to the DR system due to a specific concern.  An arguing party might state: "You don't support the newest DR system?  Do you intend to let this site turn completely lawless?"  Now, the first person quite probably does not subscribe to such an extreme, but none the less is accused of such.  This is meant to make the first person look bad to their peers by the second, even though it has no factual basis.  Sometimes used by politicians against each other, it is an intentional tactic.  If the attempt is perceived for what it is and fails, it may be played off as an attempt at sarcasm.  Please avoid this one, as it is one of the dirtiest tricks in the book.
  
 ===== Walk Away ===== ===== Walk Away =====

guide/effective_resolution.txt · Last modified: 2023/12/20 18:20 (external edit)

Page Tools

Content copyright StarArmy.com and/or individual contributors and used under license. Star Army is a registered trademark.
Terms of Service - Privacy Policy