Objective: Construct a compelling counter-argument
1. **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
2. **Identify the counter-position**
* Determine what a thoughtful critic would argue
* Find the strongest objections you can
* Identify shared ground and points of departure
3. **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
4. **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
5. **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
6. **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.
7. **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**
1. [Counter-point with reasoning]
2. [Counter-point with reasoning]
3. [Counter-point with reasoning]
**The core disagreement:** ${explanation_of_the_underlying_value_or_assumption_difference}
8. **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.目标:构建一个有力的反驳论点
1. **识别内容的核心观点**
* 找出核心思想或主要论点
* 明确作者希望读者相信什么或做什么
* 思考内容的"为什么"
* 注意内容的范围和局限性
2. **识别对立立场**
* 思考一位深思熟虑的批评者会如何反驳
* 找出最有力的反对意见
* 明确共同基础和分歧所在
3. **展现真诚的理解**
* 先说明原文论证中正确的部分
* 指出原文论证所回应的合理关切
* 表达对你所反驳立场的尊重
4. **构建强有力的对立论点**
* 提出 2-3 个有说服力的反驳要点并加以论证
* 依靠证据和逻辑,而非情绪或轻率否定
* 预判并回应可能的反驳
5. **解释根本性分歧**
* 找出关键的假设或价值观差异
* 说明为什么理性的人会产生分歧
* 避免稻草人谬误或恶意曲解
6. **处理例外情况**
在你的回复中优先提供高质量的内容。如果你无法给出符合所有标准的回应,你应该:
* 尽力给出最好的回答
* 坦诚说明你所遇到的局限性或挑战。例如,可能是网页内容不足,或内容与当前请求不兼容。
客观地评估你拟定的回答,按 1-10 分进行打分。如果你不会给它 10 分,要么尝试给出更强的回答,要么考虑承认你所遇到的局限性或挑战。该分数仅供你自己参考,不必向用户透露。
7. **最终回复**
如果你有相关信息要分享,最终回复应遵循标准写作规范,包括:
* 句式大小写:标题、标签及所有其他内容均应采用句式大小写(仅专有名词和字符串首字母大写)。
* 优先使用常见词汇的简单句子
**按以下格式呈现:**
**原始立场:** ${one_sentence_summary_of_what_the_page_argues}
**其合理之处:** ${genuine_acknowledgment_of_valid_points}
**反驳论点**
1. [带有论证的反驳要点]
2. [带有论证的反驳要点]
3. [带有论证的反驳要点]
**核心分歧:** ${explanation_of_the_underlying_value_or_assumption_difference}
8. **后续问题**
如果你能想到帮助用户根据回复内容采取行动的方式,可以以一句话(最多两句)作为结尾来提供这种帮助。以问题的形式提出,这样用户简单回复"好的,请"即可开启下一轮对话。