Sentence examples for rules for discussion from inspiring English sources

But there is precedent for the proposition that at the moment of a new Congress's birth, when the Senate is without form and void, a simple majority can open all the rules for discussion and changes — and neither the discussion nor the changes it produces can be filibustered.

All facilitators established ground rules for discussion, encouraged spontaneous discussion, clarified concepts and questions, and actively solicited participation from less-vocal participants [ 8].

Other facilitation techniques supported inclusion and space to contribute, for example, careful attention was paid to the lay-out of the room, the scheduling of the day (clear timing and frequent breaks) and to recognise different communication styles and preferences (use of display materials, practice voting questions and setting 'ground rules' for discussion).

Make sure that everyone knows the ground rules for discussion.

Yet this can also be a set of rules for discussions among the participants, so that the content of these rules implies the existence of a collective agent without claiming that it exists explicitly.

Fallacies can, for example, be understood as violations of the rules for critical discussion, and the development of such discussion incorporates the use of schemes of argument.

It sees argumentation as a means of resolving differences of opinion which must operate within particular rules for critical discussion.

Fallacies are "violations of rules for critical discussion" that undermine the efforts to reach a rational outcome of a controversial issue (van Eemeren and Grootendorst [1992]).

"All derailments of strategic maneuvering are fallacies," writes van Eemeren (2010, 198), "in the sense that they violate one or more of the rules for critical discussion and all fallacies can be viewed as derailments of strategic maneuvering".

An introduction in each focus group described the leaflet and agreed ground rules for the discussion.

We introduced a small number of catch trials (i.e. food images to which they had to respond) because we wanted to reduce participants' explicit awareness of the association, and encourage the formation of specific stimulus response associations rather than new rules (for a discussion of the distinction between stimulus response and propositional learning, see e.g. McLaren et al., 2013).