Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Counterpropaganda, like propaganda, requires developing messages understanding of the target audience and the ability to tailor the message appropriately. Effective counterpropaganda relies on communicating messages that "resonate with the target audiences" and that are based on culturally relevant narratives.
For example, in a study by Meyers-Levy and Maheswaran, subjects were more likely to counterfactual think alternative circumstances for a target person if their house burned down three days after they forgot to renew their insurance versus six months after they forgot to renew their insurance.
For example, one's opponent's action appears as forbidden torture, one's own actions as "enhanced interrogation methods", the other's violence as aggression, one's own merely as a reaction. Christensen even sees utility in the use of the argument: "The so-called 'whataboutists' question what has not been questioned before and bring ...
If you grew up watching "The O.C.," chances are the Cohen's Newport Beach mansion was (and maybe still is) your ultimate dream home. The stunning oceanfront views, Italian villa-inspired ...
The argument is that, like the starving ass, we must make a choice to avoid being frozen in endless doubt. Other counter-arguments exist. [specify] According to Edward Lauzinger, Buridan's ass fails to incorporate the latent biases that humans always bring with them when making decisions. [6] [full citation needed]
The old cliche goes, "There's no 'I' in team." There's no "I" in argument, either. However, psychologists share that using "I statements" during tense discussions can be incredibly effective—and ...
Chapter seventeen addresses the most common counter-argument that Hitchens says he hears, namely that the most immoral acts in human history were performed by atheists like Joseph Stalin. He says "it is interesting that people of faith now seek defensively to say they are no worse than fascists or Nazis or Stalinists".
A counterargument might seek to cast doubt on facts of one or more of the first argument's premises, to show that the first argument's contention does not follow from its premises in a valid manner, or the counterargument might pay little attention to the premises and common structure of the first argument and simply attempt to demonstrate that ...