Adaptive argument attack (logic)

An adaptive argument attack is a technique of which allows an individual to quickly learn new arguments on new subject matter of which they are unfamiliar (even when such information is difficult to obtain via searching or research) by using the available information.

It's similar to the Derren Brown method, except it relies heavily on memorisation of given information and knowledge (as opposed to point to point transfer of information between two individuals).

There are 3 stages to an adaptive argument attack: All cycles in an adaptive argument attack can be revisited at any stage (EG a failed engagement cycle can return to a testing cycle or learning cycle). However jumping stages forward is not recommended as it doesn't allow for a structured development of a given adaptive argument.
 * 1) Learning cycle.
 * 2) Testing cycle.
 * 3) Engagement cycle

Learning cycle
During this cycle, an individual asks various arguers and debaters questions about the subject of which they wish they learn. The questions should be impartial, and preferrably not accusationary (or trap questions like a bi-logic trap). The aim being to get the arguers to fully explain their various positions and gather as much information as possible. If the individual has a particular point of view they wish to prove but don't have the information to prove it, they should stick with generalised questions about their topic point.

Questions from people of differing points of view (EG contrarians) should be passed from one to another (a type of man-in-the-middle attack) so expanded points of view and commentary on the differing points of view can be made and thus learnt from.

Testing cycle
Once an individual has enough information, either by asking questions or learning the available information, contradictions and fallacies in the reasoning presented will begin to emerge (which is why an adaptive argument attack is more memory and processing intensive than the Derren Brown method). The testing cycle then queries to see if those contradictions are valid by querying about them (if they are invalid, it returns back to the learning cycle).

If questions about contradictions cannot be answered, then the individual would find additional information about those contradictions hoping to prise it open further. Eventually, once arguers and debaters have trouble refuting the points, it moves to the engagement cycle.

Engagement cycle
During this cycle, once an individual has the necessary information on the contradictions and various parts that cannot be answered or refuted, they can then formulate these points they have gathered into a properly constructed argument and begin engaging the arguers in various forms of debate. During this stage there may be various alternations between learning, testing and engagement as arguments are refuted and clarified, but eventually the adaptive argument attack cycle 'completes' and you rapidly become on par with other debaters on a topic of which you are previously unfamiliar with.