How to argue: counter-arguments and respect

Tests: 5 of 12 right · Exam: 1 of 4 right · Kind: ★★★ · Understood: 7 of 16 · Run: 2026-10-18, commit f3c23ea72

Lesson 40 of the religion ethics course of Mova's primary school, as Mova's small model took its tests: it had read this lesson and the ones before it and learned from their exercises. Each test shows the options in the order the student saw them, its choice, the right answer, the score of every option and why it chose. The lesson itself, sentence by sentence with trees and pragmatics: the lesson in the corpora.

Every question of this lesson and each of its options parsed by Mova, with trees and pragmatics: the lesson's questions in the corpora.

Test 1 · ★★★ · right ✓

My brother says changing your mind in an argument means you lost. Put him right.

1. Yes, a strong thinker never changes their mind about anything — score 5
2. No, changing your mind only counts if a teacher tells you to — score 8
3. Yes, whoever changes their mind first has lost the argument — score 8
4. Changing your mind for a better reason is a strength, not losing — ← Mova's choice · ✓ the right answer · score 12

Why: It took the question to ask which statement is true. It chose option 4 with score 12, against 8 for the next best. Its support: lesson 40, line 9: «Changing your mind for a good reason is a strength, and olympiad judges reward it.», reached through the remembered sentence the question matched. What matched: the same action «change» (+4); the same thing acted on «mind» (+4); the same circumstance (+4). · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 2 · ★★★ · wrong ✗

ur only saying that cos ur a goody-goody church kid. What kind of reply is this?

1. An example of steel-manning the other side's view — no support
2. A clarifying question about what a word means — no support
3. A strong counter-argument about the reasons given — ← Mova's choice · score 11
4. A personal attack — ✓ the right answer · no support

Why: It took the question to ask what it is done to. It chose option 3 with score 11, the only option with support. Its support: lesson 39, line 6: «Giving a reason means saying why you think something, not only what you think.», reached through the same lesson line as the sentence the question matched. What matched: the same action «give» (+6); it fills the role the question asks for (+3); the same thing acted on «reason» (+2). The right option, 4, found no support in what it remembers. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 3 · ★★★ · wrong ✗

Zayd, who is Muslim, thinks differently from you about a case. What is the best way to finish the discussion?

1. Walk off and refuse to talk to him again for the rest of the day — no support
2. Keep repeating your view louder until he finally agrees with you — score 5
3. Sum up both views, note what you agree on, and agree to disagree kindly — ✓ the right answer · score 5
4. Tell him his religion is the only reason he got the answer wrong in the first place — ← Mova's choice · score 6

Why: It took the question to ask what it is done to. It chose option 4 with score 6, against 5 for the next best. Its support: lesson 39, line 1: «Arguing well is not shouting; it is giving reasons: "I think X because Y". A claim is what you think, a reason is why, and evidence (facts, examples, experienc…», reached through the same lesson line as the sentence the question matched. What matched: it fills the role the question asks for (+3); the same thing acted on «reasons» (+2); a different doer (counts against) (+1). The right option, 3, scored 5. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 4 · ★★★ · right ✓

The other team says: "School should start later because tired children learn worse." You disagree. What should you do first?

1. Ignore their reason and talk about your own view only — no support
2. Say they just want to stay in bed because they are lazy — no support
3. Say their point fairly in its strongest form, then reply — ← Mova's choice · ✓ the right answer · score 5
4. Say "No it shouldn't" and wait for the judges to decide — no support

Why: It took the question to ask what is done. It chose option 3 with score 5, the only option with support. Its support: lesson 27, line 2: «In these groups children learn Bible stories, pray, sing, make friends and are free to ask honest questions about faith.», reached through the same lesson line as the sentence the question matched. What matched: it fills the role the question asks for (+4); the same action «make» (+3). Against it: a different doer (counts against) (-2). · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 5 · ★★★ · wrong ✗

Which is a straw man of "We should have more vegetarian school meals"?

1. "You want some extra vegetarian options on the menu" — ← Mova's choice · no support
2. "You think more meal choices would help health and animals" — no support
3. "So you want to ban all meat for ever and force everyone" — ✓ the right answer · no support
4. "You think more pupils might enjoy meat-free options" — no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 6 · ★★★ · wrong ✗

A judge asks: "What is the strongest objection to your answer?" What is the best reply?

1. Name a silly objection that is very easy to knock down — ← Mova's choice · no support
2. Say the other team's objections are just them being rude — no support
3. Say there are no objections because your answer is perfect — no support
4. Name a real, strong objection and explain how you weigh it — ✓ the right answer · no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 7 · ★★★ · wrong ✗

oh my god shut up, ur so annoying, u always think ur right. What should you do?

1. Walk off and tell everyone else how rude they were — ← Mova's choice · score 7
2. Shout back that they are even more annoying than you are, so there — no support
3. Agree with them just so they will stop shouting — score 7
4. Stay calm, ask what they disagree with, and answer that — ✓ the right answer · no support

Why: It took the question to ask what is done. It chose option 1 with score 7, tied with another option at 7 (the first shown, or the one claiming less beyond what it knows, wins). Its support: lesson 37, line 2: «Rules thinking (deontology) says some things, like keeping promises and not lying, are right or wrong in themselves, even when nobody finds out.», reached through the same lesson line as the sentence the question matched. What matched: it fills the role the question asks for (+4); the same action «say» (+3). The right option, 4, found no support in what it remembers. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 8 · ★★★ · wrong ✗

Ruby argues pets in class are cruel; Ben argues they're good for children. What common ground could they start from?

1. Both think the head teacher should not have any say — ← Mova's choice · no support
2. Both think pets should be kept in every single classroom — no support
3. Both want what is best for the animals and the children — ✓ the right answer · no support
4. Both think children should never be near any animals — no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 9 · ★★★ · right ✓

You and a friend still disagree after a long talk. What is the wisest thing to think?

1. Thoughtful people can disagree; the friendship still matters — ← Mova's choice · ✓ the right answer · no support
2. The friendship is over, because friends always agree — no support
3. One of us must be stupid, or we would have agreed by now — no support
4. I must keep arguing tomorrow until they finally give in — no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 10 · ★★★ · right ✓

Which shows active listening?

1. Summing up what your partner said before you answer — ← Mova's choice · ✓ the right answer · no support
2. Looking at your notes the whole time your partner speaks — no support
3. Planning your reply while your partner is still talking — no support
4. Interrupting as soon as you hear something you dislike — no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 11 · ★★★ · wrong ✗

After a round, which is the best thing to say to the other team?

1. We only lost because the judges liked you more than they liked us — ← Mova's choice · no support
2. We won, so your ideas were obviously all wrong — no support
3. That was boring and your speaker was really bad — no support
4. Thank you, you made us think hard about this case — ✓ the right answer · no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Test 12 · ★★★ · right ✓

James 1:19 says "quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to become angry". Which olympiad habit fits it best?

1. Active listening and a calm tone before replying — ← Mova's choice · ✓ the right answer · no support
2. Saying nothing at all so you never make mistakes — no support
3. Getting cross to show you really care a lot — no support
4. Speaking first and loudest to grab the judges — no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Exam question 1 · formal language · right ✓

Which of the following statements most accurately characterises the practice designated "steel-manning"?

1. The statement of an opposing view in its strongest form prior to reply — ← Mova's choice · ✓ the right answer · score 3
2. The declining of any engagement whatsoever with an opposing view — no support
3. The repetition of one's own view until the opponent concedes — score 0
4. The statement of an opposing view in its weakest form prior to reply — score 3

Why: It took the question to ask who or what does it. It chose option 1 with score 3, tied with another option at 3 (the first shown, or the one claiming less beyond what it knows, wins). Its support: lesson 40, line 2: «Steel-manning means stating the other side's view in its strongest form before you reply; it is the opposite of making it sound silly, and it is fair to your o…», reached through the same lesson line as the sentence the question matched. What matched: the same action «form» (+2); it fills the role the question asks for (+1). · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Exam question 2 · formal language · wrong ✗

Identify the principal reason for which a personal attack fails as a rebuttal.

1. It is permitted solely in the final round of competition — no support
2. It addresses the person rather than the reasons advanced — ✓ the right answer · no support
3. It addresses the reasons rather than the person concerned — ← Mova's choice · score 4
4. It is invariably delivered at insufficient volume — no support

Why: It took the question to ask which statement is true. It chose option 3 with score 4, the only option with support. Its support: lesson 40, line 12: «A personal attack criticises the person instead of the idea, and it does not answer their reasons.», reached through the remembered sentence the question matched. What matched: the same thing acted on «reasons» (+4); the same doer «attack» (+2). Against it: a different action (counts against) (-2). The right option, 2, found no support in what it remembers. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Exam question 3 · formal language · wrong ✗

Select the response consistent with the established practice of adjudicators in respect of a team which revises its view upon hearing a superior reason.

1. Such a revision is disregarded as of no consequence — ← Mova's choice · no support
2. Such a revision is regarded as a defeat and is penalised — no support
3. Such a revision is regarded as a strength and is rewarded — ✓ the right answer · no support
4. Such a revision is regarded as misconduct and disqualified — no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

Exam question 4 · formal language · wrong ✗

Given that two parties remain in disagreement after reasoned discussion, ascertain the conduct most consistent with the principles herein set out.

1. To persist in argument until one party is compelled to concede — ← Mova's choice · no support
2. To acknowledge the disagreement whilst preserving mutual respect — ✓ the right answer · no support
3. To feign agreement whilst disparaging the other party privately — no support
4. To terminate all further relations between the two parties without delay — no support

Why: No option found support in what it remembers, so it guessed: it took the first option shown. · the question and its options parsed, with trees and pragmatics

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/school-run/religion-ethics/40-how-to-argue-counter-arguments-and-respect/