In academia, disagreements are not expressed with hostility but with respect and thoughtfulness. So, how do scholars challenge flawed ideas or viewpoints in a constructive and respectful manner?
In his book Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking (2013), renowned philosopher Daniel Dennett recommends using "Rapoport's Rules" to present disagreements in a scholarly and courteous way.
By adhering to this high standard of academic etiquette, you can transform your audience into receptive listeners. It is crucial to understand your opponent's arguments as thoroughly as they do and to exercise sound judgment—key competencies in information literacy.
Recall Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement, which was discussed in the section on evaluating information to generate new ideas. This hierarchy serves as a guide for crafting well-mannered academic disagreements, as outlined by Rapoport's Rules.
Aim to formulate your disagreements or counter-arguments at the top three levels of the hierarchy. Strive to avoid the lower four levels, which are less constructive.
By following these guidelines, you can engage in meaningful and respectful academic discourse.