编者推荐:‘相互变格一’与‘相互变格二’——两篇作文论证,所用的道理都是‘以人为本’,所用的事例都是‘六渡桥’,但是,立论相对且都出彩。其原因是什么呢?两篇作文都能根据立论需要选定各自的切入角度。题为‘……势在必行’的作文,从‘名实相符’的角度说理述事;题为‘……慎之又慎’的作文,从‘文化积淀’的角度说理述事。这是两文——用同理同事论证其相对立论——都能成立的原因之一。其原因之一是:两文的标题都未绝对化,都给另一篇留下立论的空间。在论证时,两文都避开对方的锋芒,在其立论未涉及的空间‘大展拳脚’。这两篇作文是两个同学写的,但也可以认为‘它们是同一个人写的‘相互变格’——立论相对——的两篇作文。这启示我们,将同理同事的作文立论作‘质的转换’时,要运用思维品质的变通性,以发现新的立论空间。这两篇作文都紧密联系现实生活,是真正在做文章或作文,而不是‘做作’文章。 Editor’s recommendation: ’mutually change one’ and ’mutually change two’ - two compositional arguments, the reason used is ’people-oriented’, the examples used are ’Sixduqiao’, but the argument is relatively . What are the reasons? The two compositions can be selected according to the needs of their respective perspectives. The essay titled ‘It is imperative to do it’ interprets the matter from the perspective of ‘to be consistent with reality’; the essay is entitled ‘... Be cautious’ and interpret it from the perspective of ‘cultural accumulation’. This is one of the reasons why the two articles, which are based on the argument of colleagues of the same reason, can all be established. One of the reasons for this is that the titles of the two articles are not absolute and they leave room for argument in another article. In the argumentation, the two texts avoided the other side’s frontier and ‘exaggerated their feet’ in the space not covered by the argument. The two essays were written by two classmates, but they can also be regarded as two essays ‘these are the ‘mutually incompatible’ written by the same person. This inspires us to use the adaptability of the quality of thinking in order to discover a new space for arguments when we use the arguments of colleagues of the same class as “quality conversions.” Both of these essays are closely linked with real life. They are really writing articles or writing articles, not ‘contributing’ articles.