Argument structuring

From How to Criticize with Kindness: Philosopher Daniel Dennett on the Four Steps to Arguing Intelligently by Maria Popova.

Quoting Dennett.

How to compose a successful critical commentary:

1. You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.

2. You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).

3. You should mention anything you have learned from your target.

4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.

I agree in principle and this can be done to some extent in writing but it is subject to subversion from time constraints and ill-mannered participants.

Specifically, if you have ten minutes to make your argument before people lose interest, and especially when it is a complex topic where validation of predicates is required, then it becomes extremely difficult to do justice to both your opponents argument as well as your own. It can be done but it requires a lot of skill and practice.

Similarly, if your opponent in the argument is not dealing straight, then it becomes counterproductive to acknowledge any validity to their argument. Dennett's list presumes a degree of trust and respect that is often absent.

All that said, it is a very worthwhile approach even in the confines of one's own mind. Opponents rarely make the best argument for their position. How can you improve their argument for them? Once you have clarity on that it either sheds light on weaknesses in your own position or it allows you to target the material weakness in theirs.