シャドーイング練習: Why you should "steel man" other people - 動画で英語スピーキングを学ぶ

練習モードを選ぶ

各モードは全画面の練習ルームで開きます。

73 文

文が短すぎたり長すぎる場合は、Editをタップして調整してください。

A straw man is when you simplify or exaggerate somebody's position to make it an easier target.

It's a target that you can then bat down with adversarial ease.

For example, if an atheist says that Christianity is just worshipping some bearded man in the sky, that is a straw man,

because I've yet to meet a Christian who would accept that as a representation of their religion.

Of course, if a Christian then says

that an atheist is somebody who does not believe in anything at all

or that life has no meaning or that we can just do anything that is also quite likely a straw man.

The problem with a straw man argument is

that not only does it not address somebody's actual points but it poisons the entire debate.

It's a kind of bad faith argument that sees conversations as a brawl

and that truth is just one weapon in the arsenal in a war to win at all costs.

But there is a better way.

The opposite of a straw man is a steel man.

This is where you not only try to represent somebody's position as faithfully as you can and with respect, but you do so in the best possible light.

You spend a great deal of attention double-checking that what you think somebody's position is, is what that person is actually trying to argue.

A great example of this in action, I think, is Alex O'Connor.

I've yet to see a video of his where he willfully

misrepresent an argument just to make it an easier position to attack.

In fact, he'll often spend a great deal of time trying to reach a mutual understanding of the position

and only then will he criticise it and only then will he do so politely.

In my experience, if you take the time to actually inquire about what somebody actually believes, you'll find a far greater nuance and often far greater agreement than you might have thought at the start.

For example, only the most dastardly and venal of politicians are actually doing it for themselves.

I think that most politicians want to make society and the world at least a bit better.

It's just that the right and the left-wing arguments about how to do that will differ.

It's long been pointed out that calling your political opponents the enemy

or evil or idiotic without saying what that means is not only childish, but it's bad for philosophy, it's bad for democracy, and it's bad for politics.

In his 2013 book, Intuition, Pumps, and Other Tools, the philosopher Daniel Dennett laid out four rules, one of which sounds remarkably like a steel man.

These are rules for a good debate, and this is what they are.

First and most important is that you should attempt to express your target's position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says things like,

well, I wish I had put it like that as well.

For example, if somebody says to you that social media is inherently evil, you can say to them, well, do you mean that there is some content that is addictive

and dangerous and that young people especially shouldn't be expected to resist that addiction as much as adults?

Second, you should list all of the ways that you and your opponent agree on things.

You might say that, yes, okay, we both agree that there are aspects of social media that are dangerous, that we should have greater regulation and that the conversation should focus mostly on young people.

Third, you might recognize the ways in which your partner has taught you something new.

For example, you might say, oh, I didn't know that people today are on average on social media two hours a day.

Fourth and finally, only then after all of this can you go on to then try and criticize or reject that position.

You might say, I don't actually think that we should ban all social media.

In Plato's dialogues, you'll often see Socrates lining up his opponents with a steel man argument.

A huge part of the dialogue involves Socrates clarifying, laying out and even strengthening the other person's position.

For example, in the Gorgias, Socrates pauses and reframes Callicles' position about strength and domination, often making it sound more coherent than Callicles himself.

In Republic, when his opponent argues that justice is nothing more than the interests of the strongest, Socrates doesn't caricature it or simplify the idea.

Instead, he builds it up into the best version of itself, before then showing why it might be wrong.

Debates today are often about trying to grab the six o'clock headlines or ride the viral wave with an entertaining gotcha moment.

But the Socratic method was about understanding fully before disagreeing deeply because that's the spirit of the steel man.

Of course, Plato's dialogues are not podcast transcripts.

They are fictionalised accounts of Plato's version of Socrates debating Plato's version of his opponents.

But the fact that Plato was so willing to present rival opinions in such a strong and positive light, before then pulling them apart,

reveals just how far we have drifted in what we call a good discussion.

And in fact, this is why Plato was so suspicious about debates.

He called debates stupid and dangerous.

Because according to Plato, debates are very rarely about truth or philosophy.

They are about ego and pride and winning at all costs.

Plato often criticises the sophists who, amongst other things, were professional debaters and they would teach other members of the public how they could win at debates.

They taught people certain tricks and tactics to speak well, how to argue well and how to make the opponent look a bit silly.

Plato hated these kind of debates

because it reduced philosophy to a competition where both parties would try to outwit

and outspeak each other in a kind of game.

The Greeks called it heuristic and the heuristic debater would appeal to the audience.

They would mock their opponents.

They would resort to any fallacious argument they could so long as it meant they could win.

Plato thought that these debates were not just some harmless fun

because the big problem with heuristic is that those who are watching the debate confuse the winner with the truth.

But just because somebody has won a debate through wit and professional tactics doesn't necessarily mean that they are right.

For Plato, truth and philosophy is a much longer collaborative and dialectic process.

In many ways, the problem of strawmanning and ridiculing invented beliefs will not go away.

Point scoring and cheering to the crowd were present in ancient Greece

and they are here in modern primetime TV debates as well.

But the steel man is something

that we can try to bring back into everyday conversations with the people we interact with weekly.

Because what Plato and Dennett both knew is that if you are to actually grow in your beliefs, you have to see debate as a constructive act and with good intentions.

Debates are not adversarial opportunities to make your opponent look like an idiot.

They are opportunities to become better and to grow.

アプリをダウンロード

流暢に話すために必要なすべて

AI発音採点文ごとに採点

IPA練習すべての音をマスター

単語学習自分の単語帳を作る

単語ゲーム遊びながら覚える

QRをスキャン

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

同じチャンネル

118

FOR YOU

このレッスンの語彙とスピーキングのポイント

この動画には、シャドーイング用の文が73文、単語が1211語あります。音声の長さは6:27です。話す速さは速く、1分あたり約188語です。音のつながりや弱く発音される音が多くなります。単語の82%は英語の頻出3,000語に含まれます。残りは練習の前に確認しておきましょう。

この動画の重要語彙

動画に出てくる覚えておきたい単語15語を、発音と意味つきで紹介します。

単語	発音	意味
opponent 名詞	/əˈpəʊ.nənt/	相手
straw 名詞	/stɹɔ/	藁, ワラ
argue 動詞	/ˈɑɹ.ɡju/	議論する, 論ずる
dialogue 名詞	/ˈdaɪəˌlɑɡ/	対談, 対話
belief 名詞	/bɪˈliːf/	確信
tactics 名詞	/ˈtæktɪks/	戦術
politician 名詞	/ˌpɑ.ləˈtɪʃ.ən/	政治家, 政客
criticize 動詞	/ˈkɹɪtɪsaɪz/	批判する, 非難する
atheist 名詞	/ˈeɪ.θi.ɪst/	無神論者
trick 名詞	/ˈtɹɪk/	欺き, 企み
deeply 副詞	/ˈdi(ː)pli/	深く
reveal 動詞	/ɹɪˈviːl/	現す, 表す
rarely 副詞	/ˈɹɛəɹli/	滅多に…ない, 稀に
aspect 名詞	/ˈæspɛkt/	様相
silly 形容詞	/ˈsɪl.i/	馬鹿げた, 他愛ない

動画に出てくる句動詞

単語	意味
go away 動詞	去る, 出る
point out 動詞	指す, 指し示す

注意したい発音

話し手はdoesn't, I've, you'llなど、短縮形や弱形を10回使っています。聞こえたとおりの短い形で発音しましょう。

「th」の音: atheist /ˈeɪ.θi.ɪst/, strengthen /ˈstɹɛŋ(k)θən/, faithfully /ˈfeɪθfəli/
「sh」と「zh」の音: politician /ˌpɑ.ləˈtɪʃ.ən/, regulation /ˌɹɛɡjʊˈleɪʃən/, representation /ˌɹɛp.ɹə.zɛnˈteɪ.ʃən/, worship /ˈwɝ.ʃɪp/, addiction /əˈdɪkˌʃən/
長い単語（アクセントの位置に注意）: politician /ˌpɑ.ləˈtɪʃ.ən/, necessarily /ˌnɛs.əˈsɛɹ.ə.li/, regulation /ˌɹɛɡjʊˈleɪʃən/, representation /ˌɹɛp.ɹə.zɛnˈteɪ.ʃən/, collaborative /kəˈlæb.ə.ɹə.tɪv/

この動画での練習方法

まず声を出さずに動画を最後まで聞き、知らない単語をメモします。
まず0.75倍速で一文ずつシャドーイングし、慣れてきたら通常の速度に戻します。
自分の声を録音して元の音声と比べます。opponent, straw, argueなどの単語に特に注意しましょう。

この動画の文法

話し手がよく使っている文型を、動画の実際の表現とともに紹介します。

文型	動画での表現
現在完了形 have/has + 過去分詞 — 過去の出来事が今も関係している	has taught · have drifted · has won
受動態 be + 過去分詞 — 誰がするかより、何が起きるかに焦点を当てる	been pointed · be expected · are fictionalised
関係詞節 who / which + 節 — 人や物について情報を加える	somebody who does · those who are

シャドーイングとは？英語上達に効果的な理由

シャドーイング（Shadowing）は、もともとプロの通訳者養成プログラムで開発された言語学習法で、多言語習得者として知られるDr. Alexander Arguelles によって広く普及されました。方法はシンプルですが非常に効果的：ネイティブスピーカーの英語を聞きながら、1〜2秒の遅延で声に出してすぐに繰り返す——まるで「影（shadow）」のように話者を追いかけます。文法ドリルや受動的なリスニングと異なり、シャドーイングは脳と口の筋肉が同時にリアルタイムで英語を処理・再現することを強制します。研究により、発音精度、抑揚、リズム、連音、リスニング力、そして会話の流暢さが大幅に向上することが確認されています。IELTSスピーキング対策や自然な英語コミュニケーションを目指す方に特におすすめです。

シャドーイングのやり方: ステップ別の完全ガイドを読む →

シャドーイング練習: Why you should "steel man" other people - 動画で英語スピーキングを学ぶ

練習モードを選ぶ

アプリをダウンロード

同じチャンネル

Arguments for God: The Fine Tuning Argument

Shakespeare: Hamlet

“But you did it first!”: A defense of the whataboutism

The “Nietzsche Thesis”: Why we don’t really care about truth

Why you can't quit social media (and the Romans knew it)

Some brains are built for philosophy. Is yours?

The day you died (and didn't notice)

One of the cruellest things to tell any child

Every monster you fear is really you

The 4 moments that will change your life

3 philosophy classics that are better than self-help books

おすすめ動画

Why We Should Refuse to Get Into Arguments

How Can You Change Somebody's Opinion?

Become a great strategic thinker | Ian Bremmer

What Do I Project onto Other People?

The uncomfortable truth | Yuval Noah Harari

3 Things That Feel Like Progress But Aren't

Stuart & Cliffe Knechtle | Do Agnostics Just Want To Have Control? | Give Me an Answer

Why I Work So Hard Even Though I’ve Already "Made It"

Why You Should Talk To Strangers | Kio Stark | English Subtitles

How to debate a stupid person | Jonny Thomson