So who`s right and who`s wrong? In a way, both teachers are right because they seem to be working with two different definitions of « best students. » For Teacher A, the best student is the one with the highest average score. For Teacher B, the best student is someone with the highest number of A grades. Clearly, the student who meets the first definition should not be the same as the student who meets the second definition. This is an example of a purely verbal confrontation where the obvious disagreement is not due to a disagreement on the facts, but to a different understanding of the meaning of a key concept or concept. It is not uncommon for defendants to hire criminal defence lawyers who just want them to take some form of pleas. Sometimes this is the most appropriate way to deal with a case, it could include risk management and mastery of a factual matrix that can be quite aggravating if considered in its entirety before a judge. Can you give your own examples of factual and verbal conflicts? Verbal conflicts often arise from factual conflicts where differences of opinion are linked to differences of opinion on facts, not on importance. If anyone thinks That Sydney is the capital of Australia and others disagree, the disagreement is objective. Question: So there were no objective differences? Answer: Their point of view was « good, we showed you. » It`s amazing to me how childish adults can be. I don`t know why, because I see it day after day, but it has a one-upsmanship. You`ve been shown to be wrong. Yes, they did, but you had to go back 30 years to do it.
She`s got this whole attitude. So everyone feels like they`ve made their point, and all we have to do is figure out how to get it on paper. That`s the trick. However, there are situations in which the parties involved must choose a particular interpretation. For example, there may be only one prize to be awarded to the best student, so it is necessary to choose between the two definitions to decide whether Cindy or Betty should receive the award.