asking the right question（学会提问）

相似文件 换一批

是 否 +2 论坛币

k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

Asking the Right questions.pdf (5.07 MB, 需要: 5 个论坛币)

2017-4-21 09:53:56 上传

需要: 5 个论坛币  [购买]

asking the right questions是我在准备gmat考试的时候，详细阅读过好多次的一本书，这本书奠定了我去分析问题的逻辑基础。现在，博士申请结束，在开始新的学术生涯的时候，我再一次发现这本书非常好，所以分享给大家~

下面是我的笔记哒~~~
Asking the right questions
Critical thinking, (1) awareness of a set of interrelated critical questions; (2) ability to ask and answer critical questions at appropriate times; and the (3) desire to actively use the critical questions.
Chapter 1
The sponge and panning for gold, the sponge approach emphasizes knowledge acquisition; the panning-for-gold approach stresses active interaction with knowledge as it is being acquired.
Mental check: am I panning for gold?
(1) Did I ask “why” someone wants me to believe something? (2) Did I take notes as I thought about potential problems with what was being said? (3) Did I evaluate what was being said? (4) Did I form my own conclusion about the topic?
e.g. (1) what does the author mean by “overwhelming majority” or by “typical murderer”? is the minority still a substantial number of murderers who kill relatives in a moment of anger? (2) what does “gun owners” mean? Are they the ones who buy the kind of guns that gun control advocates are trying to ban? (3) how adequate were the cited research studies? Were the samples sufficiently large, random, and diverse? (4) has the author lied with statistics by impressing us with large, rather precise numbers, like 581,000, and 645,000? What is the basis for these numbers? Can we rely on them? (5) what possible benefits of gun control are not mentioned? Have important studies that disagree with the author’s position been omitted? (6) is it legitimate to assume that because some famous people own guns then owning guns is desirable? Do these people have special expertise concerning the pros and cons of gun ownership? (7) how many people are killed each year by handguns who would not have been killed were such guns not available? (8) why did the person writing the essay fail to explain how we could encourage better enforcement of existing gun control laws to demonstrate his sensitivity to the harm that guns sometimes facilitate?
Emotional involvement should not be the primary basis for accepting or rejecting a position. Ideally, emotional involvement should be most intense after reasoning has occurred. Thus, when you read, try to avoid letting emotional involvement cut you off from the reasoning of those with who you initially disagree.
Weak-sense critical thinking V.S. Strong-sense critical thinking
Weak-sense critical thinking is the use of critical thinking to defend your current beliefs. Strong-sense critical thinking is the use of the same skills to evaluate all claims an beliefs, especially your own. “He who knows only his side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may have been good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side he has no ground for preferring either opinion.”
The right questions:
(1) what are the issues and the conclusions?
(2) what are the reasons?
(3) which words or phrases are ambiguous?
(4) what are the value conflicts and assumptions?
(5) what are the descriptive assumptions?
(6) are there any fallacies in the reasoning?
(7) how good is the evidence?
(8) are there rival causes?
(9) are the statistics deceptive?
(10) what significant information is omitted?
(11) what reasonable conclusions are possible?
Chapter 2
Issue & conclusion
An issue is a question or controversy responsible for the conversation or discussion. It is the stimulus for what is being said.
Descriptive issues are those that raise questions about the accuracy of descriptions of the past, present, or future. E.g. do families who own pets have fewer arguments with one another? What causes high blood pressure? Who made the decision to increase our sales taxes? How much will college cost in the year 2010?
Prescriptive issues are those that raise questions about what we should do or what is right or wrong, good or bad. E.g. should capital punishment be abolished? What ought to be done about social security? Must we outlaw SUVs or face increasing rates of asthma?
A conclusion is the message that the speaker or writer wished you to accept.
Issues and conclusion, examples:
will owning a pet increase how long we live?
yes, it sill increase our life span by an average of 15 years.
do pets bring joy to our lives?
pets bring joy to the lives of everyone who owns them.
Searching for the conclusion
Conclusions are inferred; they are derived from reasoning. Conclusions are ideas that require other ideas to support them. In contrast, unsupported claims are what we refer to as mere opinions.
To believe one statement (the conclusion) because you think it is well supported by other beliefs is to make an inference.
Sometimes, communicators will not make their conclusions explicit; in such cases you will have to infer the conclusion from what you believe the author is trying to prove by the set of ideas she has presented.
Clues to discovery: how to find the conclusion
Clue 1: ask what the issue is.
(1) look at the title; (2) look at the opening paragraph; (3) skim several pages;
Clue 2: look for indicator words.
Consequently, hence, points, thus, it follows that, shows that, indicates that, suggests that, therefore, to the conclusion that, the point I’m trying to make is, it is highly probable that, proves that, the truth of the matter is;
Clue 3: look in likely locations
At the beginning; at the end
Clue 4: remember what a conclusion is not
Examples; statistics; definitions; background information; evidence
Clues 5: check the context of the communication and the author’s background
Clues 6: ask the question, “and therefore?”

Chapter 3 what are the reasons?
Reasons and argument
Reasons are beliefs, evidence, metaphors, analogies, and other statements offered to support or justify conclusions. They are the statements that together form the basis for creating the credibility of a conclusion. Reasons are explanations or rationales for why we should believe a particular conclusion.
You cannot determine the worth of a conclusion until you identify the reasons.
Reasons + conclusions = argument
Several characteristics of arguments grab our attention: (1) they have intent. Those who provide them hope to convince us to believe certain things or act in certain ways. Consequently, they call for a reaction. We can imitate the sponge or the gold prospector, but we ordinarily must respond somehow. (2) Their quality varies. Critical thinking is required to determine the extent of quality in an argument. (3) They have two essential visible components – a conclusion and reasons. Failure to identify either component destroys the opportunity to evaluate the argument. We cannot evaluate what we cannot identify.
Initiating the questioning process
As you determine a communicator’s reasoning structure, you should treat any idea that seems to be used to support her conclusion as a reason, even if you do not believe it provides support for the conclusion. At this stage of critical thinking, you are trying to identify the argument.
Words that identify reasons
(1) As a result of; (2) for the reason that; (3) because of the fact that; (4) in view of; (5) is supported by; (6) because the evidence is;

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享0 收藏6 回帖

关键词：question Asking Quest RIGHT skin

mental checklist for panning for gold:
(1) did I ask why someone wants me to believe sth?
(2) did I take notes as I thought about potential problems with what was being said?
(3) did I evaluate what was being said?
(4) did I form my own conclusion about the topic based on the reasonableness of what was said?

speed bumps interfering with your critical thinking
(1) the discomfort of asking the right questions.
(2) thinking too quickly. (slow thinking is the use of our brain to absorb and evaluate rationally what others are saying)
(3) stereotypes.
(4) mental habits that betray us.
halo effect: our tendency to recognize one positvie or negative quality or trait of a person, and then associate that quality or trait with everything about that person.
belief perseverance: this tendency for personal beliefs to stick or perservere. we are biased from the start of an exchange in favor of our current opinions and conclusions.
   confirmation bias: our exaggerated sense of our own competence.
   when we change our minds in light of a superior argument, we deserve to be proud that we have resisted the tempation to remain true to long-held beliefs. such a change of mind deserves to be seen as reflecting a rare strength.
availability heuristic: the mental shortcut we use again and again of forming conclusions based on whatever information is immediately available to us.
    recency effect: what is immediately available as a basis for our thining is often the most recent piece of information we have encountered.
answering the wrong question: often when someone asks us a question, we provide an immediate automatic answer that comes easily to mind and fail to respond to the question that was asked.
(5) egocentrism: the central role we assign to our world
(6) wishful thinking: many of us just form beliefs to match our make-believe world. what we wish to be true, we simply declare is true.

what are the issue and the conclusion?
an issue is a question or controversy responsible for the conversation or discussion. It is the stimulus for what is being said.
   descriptive issues are those that raise questions about the accuracy of descriptions of the past, present, or future.
   prescriptive issues are those that raise questions about what we should do or what is right or wrong, good or bad.
a conclusion is the message that the speaker or writer wishes you to accept. conclusions are supported claims, while opinions are unsupported claims.
should I accept that conclusion on the basis of what is supporting the claim?
how to find the conclusion?
(1) ask what the issue is; (2) look for indicator words: consequently, suggests that; therefore; thus; it follows that; the point I'm trying to make is; shows that; proves that; indicates that; the truth of the matter is; (3) look in likely locations; the beginning and the end; (4) remember what a conclusion is not; examples, statistics, definitions, background information, evidence; (5) check the context of the communication and author's background;
critical thinking and your own writing and speaking
(1) narrow your issue prior to writing;--> a clear precise issue;
(2) clue your reader into your conclusion --> your conclusion and your reasons should be easily identifiable.

what are the reasons?
reasons are beliefs, evidence, metaphors, analogies, and other statements offered to support or justify conclusions; or are explanations or rationales for why we should believe a particular conclusion.
you cannot determine the worth of a concluson until you identify the reasons.
argument: the combination of the reasons and the conclusion (an argument consits of a conclusion and the reasons that allegedly support it). only arguments and reasoning can be logically flawed. (1) those who provide arguments hope to convince us to believe certain things or to act in certain ways; (2) the quality of arguments varies; (3) first identify conclusion and reasons.
words that idenfity reasons:
as a result of; for the reason that; because of the fact that; in view of; is supported by; because the evidence is; studies show; first, second, third.
catogory of reasons:
facts, reasearch finding, example from real life, statistics, appeas to experts and authorities,  personal testimonials, and analogies.
using the critical question: reasons first, then conclusions
are the reasons strong?
critical thinking and your own writing and speaking
(1) exploring possible reasons before reaching a conclusion;
(2) identify major publication that cover your issue;
     you update yourself on the current discussion; you also immerse yourself in the debate, learning what issues other writer have found intriguing or controversial. you can also use the articles you uncover as a spring-board for more research.
(3) help your readers identify your reasons
     display your reasons openly, or give them a blueprint.

what words or phrases are ambiguous?(critical question)
(1) the confusing flexibility of words;
we often misunderstand what we read or hear because we presume that the meaning of words is obvious.
focus yourself to search for ambiguity.
ambiguity refers to the existence of multiple possible meanings for a word or phrase.
(2) locating key terms and phrases
identify what words or phrases seem crucial in determing how well the author's reasons support her conclusion;
the more abstract a word or phrase, the more likely it is to be susceptible to multiple interpretations.
clues for locating key terms: (a) review the issue for possible key terms; (b) look for crucial words or phrases within the reasons and conclusion; (c) keep an eye out for abstract words and phrases; (d) use reverse role-playing to determine how someone might define certain words and phrases differently.
(3) context
context provides clues to the meaning of a potential key term: writer's or speaker's background, traditional uses of the term within the particular controversy, and the words and statements proceding the following the possible ambiguity.
(4) ambiguity, definitions, and the dictionary
synonyms (同义词), examples, and what we will call definition by specific crtiteria;
(5) ambiguity and loaded language
terms and phrases have both denotative and connotative meanings. the denotative meaning refers to the agreed-upon explicit descriptive referents for use of the word. the connotative meaning is the emotional associations that we have to a term or phrase. terms that trigger strong emotional reactions are called loaded terms.
(6) limits of your responsibility to clarify ambiguity
we suggest you ignore any reason containing ambiguity that makes it impossible to judge the acceptability of the reason.
(7) ambiguity and your own writing and speaking
keep your eye out for ambiguity; immerse yourself in the ongoing discussion of your issue in popular and academic publications. retunr to this research, do authors in the ongoing discussion debate over specific terms or use the same terms differently? start a dialogue. take a moment to think about your audience.

what are the value and descriptive assumptions?
assumptions are : (1) hidden or unstated (in most cases); (2) taken for granted; (3) influential in determining the conclusion; (4) potentially deceptive;
when you identify assumptions and make them explicit in your interactions with others, you make a tremendous contribution to the quality of the reasoning in our community as well.
general guid for identifying assumptions
look for assumptions needed for the reasons to support the conclusions;
look for ones necessary for a reason to be true;
value conflicts and assumptions
an individual's values influence the reasons he provides and consequently his conclusion;
reasons will logically support the conclusion only when the value assumption is added to the reasoning.
from values to value assumptions
a value assumption is an implicit preference for one value over another in a particular context. we use value preferences and value priorities as synonyms.
the context and factual issues associated with a controversy also greatly influence how far we're willing to go with a particular value preference.
typical value conflicts

1.loyalty -- honesty
should you tell your parents about your sister's drug habit?
2.competition -- cooperation
do you support the grading system?
3.freedom of press -- national security
is it wise to hold weekly presidential press conferences?
4.order -- freedom of speech

5.rationality -- spontaneity
should we imprison those with radical ideas?
should you check the odds before placing a bet?

the communicator's background as a clue to value assumptions
it isn't necessarily true that because a person is a member of group, she shares the particular value assumptions of the group. it would be a mistake to presume that every individual who belongs to a given group thinks identically.

consequences as clues to value assumptions
an important means of determining an individual's value assumptions is to note the reasons given in support of a conclusion and then to determine waht value priorities would lead to these reasons being judged as more desirable than reasons that might have been offered on the other side of the issue.

more hints for finding value assumptions
reverse role-play

clues for identifying value assumptions
(1) investigate the author's background; (2) ask why do the consequences of the author's position seem so important to him or her? (3) search for similar social controversies to find analogous value assumptions; (4) use reverse role-playing. take a position opposite the author's position and identify which values are important to that opposite position; (5) look for common value conflicts, such as individual responsibility versus community responsibility.

identifying and evaluating descriptive assumptions
descriptive assumptions are beliefs about the way the world was, is or will be.
common descriptive assumptions
(1) the events that happen to people are primarily the result of personal choices;
(2) the speaker or writer is a typical person;
(3) the world is just;
(4) because sth happened in the past, it will happen in the future;
(5) my world is the center of the universe.

clues for locating assumptions
(1) keep thinking about the gap between the conclusion and reasons;
(2) look for unstated ideas that support reasons;
(3) identify with the writer or speaker;
(4) identify with the opposition;
(5) avoid stating incompletely established reasons as assumptions;

assumptions and your own writing and speaking
you will never be able to write without your values and descriptive beliefs influencing your arguments;
writers hould be particular concerned about the influence of these beliefs in their writing for two reasons: (1) these beliefs are often unstated or assumed; (2) when you write, try as best you can to reveal the assumptions that are guiding your thoughts. give those who are receiving your communication attempts a fair chance to fully understand the basis for your reasoning. share with them why you are so convinced that these assumptions are correct.

clues for discovering descriptive assumptions
(1) keep thinking about the gap between the conclusion and reasons;
(2) look for ideas that support reasons;
(3) identify with the opposition;
(4) learn more about the issues.

chapter 7 are there any fallacies in the reasoning?
what are the issue and the conclusion?
what are the reasons?
what words or phrases are ambiguous?
what are the value and descriptive assumptions?
common tricks are : (1) providing reasoning that requires erroneous or incorrect assumptions, thus making it irrelevant to the conclusion; (2) distracting us by making information seem relevant to the conclusion when it is not; and; (3) providing support for the conclusion that depends on the conclusion already being true.
a fallacy is a reasoning trick that an author might use while trying to persuade you to accept a conclusion.
ad hominem: an attack on the person, rather than directly addressing the person's reasons;
slippery slope: making the assumption that a proposed step will set off an uncontrollable chain of undesirable events, when procedures exist to prevent such a chain of events.
searching for prefect solution: falsely assuming that because part of a problem remains after a solution is tried, the solution should not be adopted.
appeal to popularity (ad populum): an attempt to justify a claim by appealing to sentiments that large groups of people have in common; falsely assume that anything favored by a large group is desirable.
appeal to questionable authority: supporting a conclusion by citing an authority who lacks special expertise on the issue at hand.
appeals to emotions: the use of emotionally charged language to distract readers and listeners from relevant reasons and evidence. common emotions appealed to are fear, hope, patriotism, pity, and sympathy.
straw person: distorting our opponent's point of view so that it is easy to attack; thus we attack a point of view that does not truly exist.
false dilemma (either-or): assuming only two alternatives when there are more than two.
explaining by naming: falsely assuming that because you have provided a name for some event or behavior, you have also adequately explained the event.
the planning falllacy: the tendency for people or organizations to underestimate how long they will need to complete a task, despite numerous prior experiences of having underestimated how long something would take to finish.
glittering generality: the use of vague, emotionally appealing virtue words that dispose us to approve sth without closely examining the reasons.
red herring: an irrelevant topic is presented to divert attention from the original issue and help to win an argument by shifting attention away from the argument and to another issue. the fallacy sequence in this instance is as follows: (a) topic A is being discussed; (b) topic B is introduced as though it is relevant to topic A, but it is not; (c) topic A is abandoned.
beg the question: an argument in which the conclusion is assumed in the reasoning.

chapter 8 how good is the evidence: intuition, personal experience, case examples, testimonials, and appeals to authority?
what are the issue and the conclusion?
what are the reasons?
what words or phrases are ambiguous?
what are the value and descriptive assumptions?
how good is the evidence: intuition, personal  experience, case examples, testimonials, and appeals to authority?

what is your proof? how do you know that's true? where is the evidence? why do you believe that? are you sure that's true? can you prove it?

locating factual claims
descriptive conclusions; reasons used to support either descriptive or prescriptive conclusions; descriptive assumptions;

sources of evidence
evidence is explicit information shared by the communicator that is used to back up or to justify the dependability of a factual claim. in prescriptive arguments, evidence will be needed to support reasons that are factual claims; in descriptive arguments, evidence will be needed to directly support a descriptive conclusion.

major kinds of evidence
intuition; personal experiences; case examples; testimonials; appeals to authorities or experts; personal observations; research studies; analogies;

intuition: private
personal experiences: lead to hasty generalization fallacy;
hasty generalization: a person draws a conclusion about a large group based on experiences with only a few members of the group;
case examples: possibilities;
testimonials: selectivity, personal interest; omitted information; the human factor;
appeals to authorities:
was the authority in a position to have especially good access to pertinent facts?
is there good reason to believe that the authority is relatively free of distorting influences?
has the authority developed a reputation for frequently making dependable claims?

your academic writing and evidence
a high value is placed on research that is publicly verificable, conducted according to the scientific method, and reviewed by the authors; peers before publication.

chapter 9 how good is the evidence: personal observation, research studies, and analogies?
what are the issue and the conclusion?
what are the reasons?
what words or phrases are ambiguous?
what are the value and descriptive assumptions?
how good is the evidence: intuition, personal  experience, case examples, testimonials, and appeals to authority?
how good is the evidence: personal observation, research studies, and analogies?

Personal observation as evidence
the most reliable reports will be based on recent observations made by several people observing under optimal conditions who have no apparent, strong expectations or biases related to the event being observed.

research studies as evidence
scientific method: (1) it seeks information in the form of publicly verifiable data; (2) characteristic of scientific method is control. (3) precision. [Replication, control, and precision]
general problems with research findings
(1) research varies greatly in quality;
(2) research findings often contradict one another;
(3) research findings do not prove conclusions;
(4) like all of us, researchers have expectations, attitudes, values, and needs that bias the questions they ask, the way they conduct their research, and the way they interpret their research findings.
(5) speakers and writers often distort or simplify research conclusions.
(6) research facts change over time, especially claims about human behavior;
(7) research varies in how artificial it is.
(8) the need for financial gain, status, security, and other factors can affect research outcomes and selection of which studies will be published.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) what is the quality of the source of the report?
(2) are there other clues included in the communication suggesting the research was well done? does the report detail any special strengths of the research?
(3) how recently was the research conducted, and are there any reasons to believe that the findings might have changed over time?
(4) have the study's findings been replicated by other studies?
(5) how selective has the communicator been in choosing studies?
(6) is there any evidence of strong-sense critical thinking?
(7) is there any reason for someone to have distorted the research?
(8) are conditions in the research artificial and therefore distorted?
(9) how far can we generalize, given the research sample?
(10) are there any biases or distortions in the surveys, questionnaires, ratings, or other measurements that the researcher uses?
Impossible certainty: assuming that a research conclusion should be rejected if it is not absolutely certain.
generalizing from the research sample
(1) sampling: large, diverse, random.
(2) we can generalize only to people and events that are like those that we have studied in the research.
generalizing from the research measures
how satisfactory were the measures? are there other ways to measure the concept, and if so, might they provide different results?
biased surverys and questionnaires

analogies as evidence
identify an argument by analogy by noticing that sth that has well-known characteristics is being used to help explain something that has some similar characteristics.
eveluate: (1) the ways the two things being compared are similar and different; (2) the relevance of the similarities and the differences.
faulty analogy: occurs when an analogy is proposed in which there are important relevant dissimilarities.

chapter 10 are there rival causes?
a rival cause is a plausible alternative explanation that can explain why a certain outcome occurred.
when: leads to; influences; is linked to; deters; increases the likelihood; determines; is associated with; has the effect of;
cause oversimplification: explaining an event by relying on causal factors that are insufficient to account for the event or by overemphasizing the role of one or more of these factors.
rival causes for differences between groups
research groups almost always differ in more than one important way.
confusing causation with association
X is a cause of Y;
Y is a cause of X;
X and Y are associated because of some third factor, Z;
X and Y influence each other;
confusion of cause and effect: confusing the cause with the effect of an event or failing to recognize that the two events may be influencing each other.
neglect of a common cause: failure to recognize that two events may be related because of the effects of a common third factor.
confusing after this with because of this
post hoc: assuming that a particular event, B, is caused by another event, A, simply because B follows A in time.
rival causes and your own communication
in comparing causes, apply the following criteria:
(1) their logical soundness. which ones make the most sense to you
(2) their consistency with other knowledge that you have
(3) their previous success in explaining or predicting similar events
(4) the extent to which the explanation is implied by a greater variety of accepted truths than other explanations
(5) the extent to which it has been disconfirmed by fewer accepted beliefs
(6) the extent to which it explains a larger number and variety of facts that competing explanations.
exploring potential causes

chapter 11 are the statistics deceptive?
statistics can and often lie. they do not necessary prove that they appear to prove.
confusing averages
mean; median; mode; range; distribution;
concluding one thing, proving another
(1) to blind yourself to the communicator's statistics and ask yourself "what statistical evidence would be helpful in proving her conclusion". then, to compare the needed statistics to the statistics given. to find out whether they match.
(2) to examine the author's statistics very closely while blinding yourself to the conclusion; then ask yourself, what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn from the statistics.

chapter 12 what significant information is omitted?
the certainty of incomplete reasoning
(1) time and space imposes limitations on arguments;
(2) arguments must be given quickly due to limited attention spans;
(3) the arguer will always have incomplete knowledge;
(4) arguments often attempt to deceive;
(5) the arguer often will have different values, belief, and attitudes from yours;
clues to finding common kinds of significant information
(1) common counterarguments
what reasons would someone who disagrees offer?
are there research studies that contradict the studies presented?
are there missing examples, testimonials, and opinions from well-respected authorities, or analogies that support the other side of the argument?
(2) missing definitions
how would the arguments differ if key terms were defined in other ways?
(3) missing value preferences or perspectives
would different values create a different approach to this issue?
what arguments would flow from values different from those of the speaker or writer?
(4) origins of facts referred to in the argument
what is the source for the facts?
are the factual claims supported by competent research or by reliable sources?
(5) details of procedures used for gathering facts
how many people completed the questionnaire?
how are the survey questions worded?
did respondents have ample opportunity to provide answers different from those reported by the person using the responses?
(6) alternative techniques for gathering or organizing the evidence
how might the results from an interview study differ from written questionnaire results?
would a laboratory experiment have created more reliable and informative results?
(7) missing or incomplete figures, graphs, tables, or data
would the data look different if they included evidence from earlier or later years?
has the author stretched the figure to make the differences look larger?
(8) omitted effects, both positve and negative and both short and long term, of what is advocated and what is opposed
has the argument left out important positive or negative consequences of a proposed action? what are the costs? what are the benefits?
do we need to know the impact of the action on any of the following areas: political, social, economic, biological, spiritual, health, or environmental?
(9) omission of prediction failures, or misses, when arguing for special prediction skills
when psychics or intuitionists promote their special abilities, we need to ask how often their predictions have proven to be untrue;
we need to know the frequency of prediction failures, as well of successes, of economists, financial advisers, sports gamblers, and political pundits before concluding that they have special expertise.
the importance of the negative view
which segments of society do not benefit from a proposed action? who loses? what do the losers have to say about it?
how does the proposed action affect the distribution of power?
what are the action's effects on our health?
how does the action influence our relationships with one another? with the natural enviroment?

chapter 13 what reasonable conclusions are possible?
avoid dictonomy thinking

一共就这么多笔记啦~~祝愿大家学习愉快！

谢谢楼主分享好书和自己的学习笔记！

请问， 书是第几版

感谢分享~~~~~~