Coaching practices for Follow the Argument
Describe almost anything you are working through and IX Coach finds the practices whose real-world fit is closest. For Follow the Argument, these are the strongest matches in the current practice library.
Does this sound like the set of challenges you might be facing?
- Every reason I come up with points the same way, and that smoothness is starting to make me suspicious
- I notice I believe things mostly based on who said them
- On paper my reasoning checks out, but the conclusion still feels shaky and I can’t locate why
- The case feels solid because I’ve got several decent reasons stacked up, but I keep ignoring that the whole thing actually hinges on one shaky step I’ve never checked
- I notice I’m really arguing against this person
Practices that may help
- Add the strongest objection to every major supporting reason
For each supporting reason, find the best counter and put it on the map.
Argument Mapping - Evaluate the argument structure, not the source
Map the logic and evaluate it independently of who made the argument.
Argument Mapping - Surface the hidden premises
Find the unstated assumptions that the argument needs to work.
Argument Mapping - Rate the strength of each logical link
Assign a confidence to each "supports" or "rebuts" link, not just to the conclusion.
Argument Mapping - Separate the argument from the arguer
Address the claim on its merits, not the person’s motives or character.
Productive Disagreement, Made Practical - Steel-man before you rebut
Restate the opposing view in its strongest form before you argue against it.
Productive Disagreement, Made Practical - Apply Dennett’s four rules for critical commentary
Before criticizing: restate charitably, list agreements, name what you’ve learned, then — and only then — rebut.
Steelmanning - Find the crux: the one claim that, if changed, would change the conclusion
Locate the single empirical or value disagreement driving the whole dispute.
Productive Disagreement, Made Practical - Walk down the ladder together in disagreements
In conflict, stop arguing about conclusions and descend together to the data level.
The Ladder of Inference - Lead with argument quality on the central route
When your audience is engaged and able, weak arguments actively backfire — make every point earn its place.
Elaboration Likelihood Model, Made Practical
Related concerns
- How To Evaluate Arguments Fairly
Address the claim on its merits, not the person’s motives or character.
Separate the argument from the arguer
- How To Organize Arguments
For each supporting reason, find the best counter and put it on the map.
Add the strongest objection to every major supporting reason
- How To Diagram An Argument
For each supporting reason, find the best counter and put it on the map.
- Logical Argument Structure
Start every map by writing the central claim and the distinct reasons offered for it.
Separate the claim from its reasons
- What Is Underneath A Recurring Argument
Locate the single empirical or value disagreement driving the whole dispute.
Find the crux: the one claim that, if changed, would change the conclusion
- Dialectical Reasoning
In conflict, stop arguing about conclusions and descend together to the data level.
Walk down the ladder together in disagreements
Describe your situation in your own words to search the complete practice library.