Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Appears well balanced

Article summary:

1. Bo Seo, a two-time world debate champion and former coach of the Australian and Harvard debate teams, introduces the RISA Framework to help people pick their fights more wisely.

2. The RISA Framework involves asking four questions before engaging in a disagreement: Is it real or a misunderstanding? Is it important enough to justify the disagreement? Is it specific enough to make progress? Are both parties aligned in their objectives for wanting to partake in the conversation?

3. Debaters also use side-switch exercises to imagine a world in which they are wrong and create wiggle room for humility and empathy.

Article analysis:

The article is written by Bo Seo, a two-time world debate champion and former coach of the Australian and Harvard debate teams, so it is likely that he has expertise on the topic of argumentation. He provides an overview of his own framework for argumentation, called the RISA Framework, which includes four questions that should be asked before engaging in a disagreement. He also discusses side-switch exercises used by debaters to imagine being wrong and create space for humility and empathy.

The article does not appear to have any biases or one-sided reporting; instead, it presents an objective overview of Seo's framework as well as other strategies used by debaters. It does not make unsupported claims or omit points of consideration; instead, it provides detailed explanations of how each strategy works. Additionally, there is no promotional content or partiality present in the article; instead, Seo provides an unbiased overview of his framework as well as other strategies used by debaters. Furthermore, possible risks are noted throughout the article; for example, Seo acknowledges that even if one follows his framework carefully, there is no guarantee that conversations will go well. Finally, both sides are presented equally throughout the article; Seo does not favor one side over another but rather provides an objective overview of different strategies used by debaters.

In conclusion, this article appears to be trustworthy and reliable due to its lack of bias or one-sided reporting as well as its detailed explanations and lack of promotional content or partiality.