FIGURE (left). Devil’s advocacy identifies and critiques the underlying facts and assumptions that must be true for a proposal to achieve its aims. At the end of debate, the team should reevaluate said assumptions and draft a final recommendation. FIGURE (right). Dialectical inquiry critiques the facts and assumptions of two or more proposals. The team then creates a set of shared facts and assumptions that should be used to reshape a current proposal or develop a new one.
FIGURE (left). Devil’s advocacy identifies and critiques the underlying facts and assumptions that must be true for a proposal to achieve its aims. At the end of debate, the team should reevaluate said assumptions and draft a final recommendation. FIGURE (right). Dialectical inquiry critiques the facts and assumptions of two or more proposals. The team then creates a set of shared facts and assumptions that should be used to reshape a current proposal or develop a new one.
No Responses to “FIGURE (left). Devil’s advocacy identifies and critiques the underlying facts and assumptions that must be true for a proposal to achieve its aims. At the end of debate, the team should reevaluate said assumptions and draft a final recommendation. FIGURE (right). Dialectical inquiry critiques the facts and assumptions of two or more proposals. The team then creates a set of shared facts and assumptions that should be used to reshape a current proposal or develop a new one.”