How to Disagree with Someone more powerful than you.Your boss proposes a new initiative you think won’t work. Your senior colleague outlines a project timeline you think is unrealist.
What do you say when you disagree with someone who has more power than you do? How do you decide whether it's worth speaking up? And if you do, what exactly should you say? Here is how to disagree with someone more powerful than you.
1.（  ）
After this risk assessment, You may decide it’s best to hold off on voicing your opinion. Maybe you haven’t finished thinking the problem through the whole discussion was a surprise to you, or you want to get a clearer sense of what the group thinks. If you think other people are going to disagree too, you might want to gather your army first. People can contribute experience or information to your thinking--all the things that would make the disagreement stronger or more valid It' s also a good idea to delay the conversation if you re in a meeting or other public space. Discussing the issue in private will make the powerful person feel less threatened.
2. （  ）
Before you share your thoughts, think about what the powerful person cares about—it may be “the credibility of their team of getting a project done on time. You're more likely to be heard if you can connect your disagreement to a higher purpose. When you do speak up, don' t assume the link will be clear You ll want to state it overtly, contextualizing your statements so that you re seen not as a disagreeable underling but as a colleague who' s trying to advance a shared goal. The discussion
will then become more like a chess game than a boxing match,” says Weeks
3. （  ）
This step may sound overly deferential, but it's a smart way to give the powerful person psychological safety and control. You can say something like, I know we seem to be moving toward a first-quarter commitment here i have reasons to think that won't work i' d like to way out my reasoning. Would that be ok? This gives the person a choice, allowing them to verbally opt in. And, assuming they say yes it will make you feel more confident about voicing you disagreement.
4.（  ）
You might feel your heart racing or your face turning red but do whatever you can to remain neutral in both your words and actions. When your body language communicates reluctance or anxiety,it undercuts the message. It sends a mixed message, and your counterpart gets to choose what to read. Deep breaths can help, as can speaking more slowly and deliberately. When we feel panicky we tend to talk louder and faster. Simply slowing the pace and talking in an even tone helps the other person calm down and does the same or you. It also makes you seem confident, even if you aren’t.
5.（  ）
Emphasize that you re offering your opinion, not gospel truth.I may be a well-informed, well-researched opinion, but it's still an opinion, my talk tentatively and slightly understate your confidence instead of saying something like,"If we set an end-of-quarter deadline, we'll never make it," say,This is just my opinion, but don’t see how we will make that deadline. Having asserted your position(as a position, not as a fact)demonstrate equal curiosity about other views remind the person that this is
your point of view and then invite critique. Be open to hearing other opinions.

climate

With the global population predicted to hit close to 10 billion by 2050, and forecasts that agricultural production in, some regions will need to nearly double to keep pace, food security is increasingly making headlines. In the UK, it has become a big talking point recently too, for rather particular reason: Brexit.
Brexit is seen by some as an opportunity to reverse a recent trend towards the UK importing food. The country produces only about 60 percent of the food it eats,down from almost three-quarters in the late 1980s.A move back to self-sufficiency, the argument goes, would boost the farming industry, political sovereignty and even the nation's health. Sounds great—but bow feasible is this vision?

According to a report on UK food production from the University of Leeds,UK,85 per cent of the country's total land area is associated with meat and dairy production. That supplies 80 per cent of what is consumed, so even covering the whole country in livestock farms wouldn't allow us to cover all our meat and dairy needs.

There are many caveats to those figures, but they are still grave. To become much more self- sufficient, the UK would need to drastically reduce its consumption of animal foods,and probably also farm more intensively—meaning fewer green fields, and more factory-style production.
But switching to a mainly plant-based diet wouldn't help. There is a good reason why the UK is dominated by animal husbandry: most of its terrain doesn't have the right soil or climate to grow crops on a commercial basis. Just 25 percent of the county's land is suitable for crop-growing, most of which is already occupied by arable fields. Even if we converted all the suitable land to fields of fruit and veg—which would involve taking out all the nature reserves and removing thousands of people from their homes—we would achieve only a 30 percent boost in crop production.
Just 23 percent of the fruit and vegetables consumed in the UK are currently home-grown, so even with the most extreme measures we could meet only 30 percent of our fresh produce needs. That is before we look for the space to grow the grains,sugars,seeds and oils that provide us with the vast bulk of our current calorie intake.
1.Some people argue that food self-sufficient in UK would
2.The report by the University of Leeds shows that in the UK
3.Crop-growing in he UK is restricted due to
4.It can be learned from the last paragraph that British people
5.The author's attitude to food self-sufficient in the UK is

conflict

current 

democracy 

desirable 

imply 

initial

multitude