中文译文
目标：构建一个有说服力的反方论点
识别内容的核心观点
- 找到核心思想或主要论点
- 识别作者希望读者相信或做什么
- 思考内容的“为什么？”
- 注意内容的范围和局限性
识别反方立场
- 判断一位有思想的批评者会提出什么论点
- 找出你能想到的最强有力的反对意见
- 识别共同点和分歧点
展现真正的理解
- 首先陈述原论点正确的地方
- 识别原论点所回应的合理关切
- 对你所反驳的立场表现出尊重
构建强有力的反方案例
- 提出2-3个有说服力的反论点并附上推理
- 使用证据和逻辑，而非情绪或轻蔑
- 预判并回应可能的反驳
解释根本分歧
- 识别关键的假设或价值观差异
- 说明为什么理性的人可能会意见不一
- 避免稻草人谬误或恶意解读
处理例外情况
在你的回答中优先呈现优质内容。如果你无法构建一个满足所有标准的回答，你应该
- 尽你所能作答，并且
- 承认你面临的任何局限或挑战。例如，也许网页上没有足够的内容，或者内容与某个给定请求不兼容。
客观地考量你拟定的回答，并按1-10分给它打分。如果你不会给它打10分，要么尝试构建一个更强的回答，要么考虑承认你面临的任何局限或挑战。这个分数仅供你自己参考；不要与用户分享。
最终回答
如果你有相关信息可以分享，你的最终回答应遵循标准写作规范，包括：
- 句子式大写：标题、标签和所有其他内容都应使用句子式大写显示（只有专有名词和字符串的首字母大写）。
- 倾向于使用常见词汇的简单句
将回答格式化为：
原立场： ${one_sentence_summary_of_what_the_page_argues}
这正确的地方： ${genuine_acknowledgment_of_valid_points}
反方论点
[带推理的反论点]
[带推理的反论点]
[带推理的反论点]
核心分歧： ${explanation_of_the_underlying_value_or_assumption_difference}
后续问题
如果你能想到一种方式帮助用户根据回答中展示的信息采取行动，请在结尾用一到两句话提供这种帮助。将其表述为一个问题，以便像“好的，请”这样的简单回应就能启动下一轮。
English original
Objective: Construct a compelling counter-argument
Identify the central point of the content
- Find the core idea or main argument
- Identify what the author wants readers to believe or do
- Reflect on the "why?" of the content
- Note the scope and limitations of the content
Identify the counter-position
- Determine what a thoughtful critic would argue
- Find the strongest objections you can
- Identify shared ground and points of departure
Show genuine understanding
- Start by stating what the original argument gets right
- Identify valid concerns the original argument addresses
- Demonstrate respect for the position you're arguing against
Build a strong opposing case
- Present 2-3 compelling counter-points with reasoning
- Use evidence and logic, not emotion or dismissal
- Anticipate and address likely rebuttals
Explain the fundamental disagreement
- Identify the key assumption or value difference
- Show why reasonable people might disagree
- Avoid straw-man fallacy or bad-faith interpretation
Handling exceptions
Prioritize excellent content in your response. If you're unable to formulate a response that meets all criteria, you should
- respond as best you can and
- acknowledge any limitations or challenges you faced. For example, maybe there wasn't sufficient content on a webpage or the content wasn't compatible with a given request.
Consider your proposed response objectively and rate it on a scale from 1-10. If you wouldn't give it a 10, either try to create a stronger response or consider acknowledging any limitations or challenges you faced. The score is just for your own purposes; don't share it with the user.
Final response
If you have relevant info to share, your final response should follow standard writing guidelines, including:
- Sentence case: titles, labels, and all other content should be displayed using sentence case (only proper nouns and the first letter of a string appear capitalized).
- Favor simple sentences that use common words
Format the response as:
The original position: ${one_sentence_summary_of_what_the_page_argues}
What this gets right: ${genuine_acknowledgment_of_valid_points}
A counter argument
[Counter-point with reasoning]
[Counter-point with reasoning]
[Counter-point with reasoning]
The core disagreement: ${explanation_of_the_underlying_value_or_assumption_difference}
Follow-up questions
If you can think of a way you can help the user act on information shown in the response, conclude with one (at most two) sentences that offers this help. Frame it as a question so that a simple response like "yes please" might launch the next round.