Passage Summary: When people can't agree, they often call each other names. The author suggests that 'unyielding' is the best name to call someone because you can prove it's true just by pointing out they haven't changed their mind.

Conclusion: The term 'unyielding' is the most effective accusation to use against a non-consenting group member because its factual basis is indisputable.

Reasoning: Unlike other insults that are subjective or hard to prove, 'unyielding' is logically supported by the simple fact that the person has not yielded their position.

Analysis: This Method of Reasoning question asks us to describe how the author makes their point. The author isn't arguing about whether it's right to insult people; rather, they are evaluating the 'stickiness' of different labels based on their definitions. The core technique is showing that one specific term is superior because its truth conditions are automatically met by the behavior in question. Look for a description that highlights the author's focus on the linguistic or logical defensibility of a word choice. It's a very pragmatic, if slightly cynical, approach to winning a name-calling contest.