This article is part of the chapter that explains how to refute an opposing speaker's arguments. In chapter 6 articles: What is a contradiction?, counter arguments, Contradiction using logic, Contradiction with facts, Contradiction using the rules of speech, and how to organize a speech and a contradiction.
Contradiction with the help of logic and logic
This is the type of contradiction that is not based on either party's greater knowledge of the facts. Instead it is logical and it uses the same basic facts but reaches different conclusions. This is probably too broad a concept to be described comprehensively - the "polemical contradiction" is just a more impressive way of saying that you disagree with someone. Of course, it is important to show why you disagree. The easy trap to fall into is to believe that the flaws in your opponents' arguments are understandable. You must always explain these defects. It is never enough to just say that the opposition's argument is "ridiculous" and move on. If they thought he was good, the audience could think that way too. There are many contradictory ways and cannot be classified. You should note, however, the distinction that exists between direct and indirect argument.
direct argument
The direct argument is the norm and is the type used in most of my examples. It has to do with pointing out the flaws in your opponents' reasoning and showing how these flaws disprove the opponent's arguments. You can work through the logic of the argument and point out where it fails or you can show that the broader consequences of your opponents' arguments are undesirable. The common characterization here is that the arguments show that the other side's arguments are incorrect. For example, in the debate that dealt with the war in Chechnya, the government claimed that Russia would only save itself trouble by freeing itself from the burden of Chechnya and Mordia. The opposition claimed in response that the logical continuation of this step is that any group that chooses to demand independence will automatically win, and as a result Russia (which is known to be made up of a mosaic of nationalities and ethnic groups) will break into pieces.