This chart is pretty useful, but here are some other questions that also could be asked:
Who benefits?
Who decides how it’s carried out?
Why is this any of our business?
What’s the evidence?
What’s the most reasonabe counterargument?
What could go wrong, and what’s to keep it from going wrong?
Where the else do we apply this standard and is the proportionality completely out of whack?
How could this be exploited by someone acting in bad faith?
What are the limits on the ill-effects this could produce?
Who or what is the speaker NOT applying this principle to?
And then, one final golden quote from Paul Graham:
“Remember the exercises in critical reading you did in school, where you had to look at a piece of writing and step back and ask whether the author was telling the whole truth? If you really want to be a critical reader, it turns out you have to step back one step further, and ask not just whether the author is telling the truth, but why he's writing about this subject at all.”
Now, let's consider these two articles:
Taipei mayor calls trip to Shanghai 'very successful'
vs.
Ko Wen-je got played in Shanghai
First, let's talk language:
What are the titles of these two articles actually saying?
Next, let's get our feelings out in the open:
How do you feel about 柯文哲?
How do you feel about the job he's done in Taipei up until now?
Now, let's apply the questions above to these two articles.
Was going to Shanghai a good thing? Or did he get played?
What are the wider implications, for Taiwanese internal politics, Taiwan China relations and worldwide politics?
