How does this author develop and/or support the thesis?

In his treatise, Paulo Freire supports his thesis with four arguments. His thesis, of course, is that problem-posing education is far superior to conventional "banking" education, in which the teacher "deposits" knowledge into the minds of students.
In each of his arguments, Freire contrasts traditional banking education with problem-posing education. He states that banking education is ineffective because it promotes a sterile "teacher-knows-all" paradigm and by extension, rote-memorization. Instead of critical analysis, students just regurgitate the facts their teachers give them.
Freire's four supporting arguments are:
1) Conventional banking education promotes a myth of reality. The teacher presents reality as "motionless, static, compartmentalized, and predictable." Instead of discovering truths for themselves, students are forced to accept (without question) the teacher's definition of reality. Freire argues that this forced indoctrination of students is inauthentic and dehumanizing.
2) Freire argues that conventional banking education is stifling, sterile, and oppressive. Instead of inhibiting creative power, problem-posing education releases the consciousness and allows it to accept new truths. To Freire, a deepened consciousness leads to inquiry and transformation (or a full humanization of the individual).
3) Conventional banking education stymies dialogue. On the other hand, problem-posing education welcomes dialogue, which enriches the learning experience of students. Additionally, problem-posing education contributes to the intellectual and emotional development of both students and teachers. Freire maintains that it is dialogue that promotes cognitive ability and unveils reality in an organic fashion.
4) Conventional banking education basically robs students of their individuality and cripples their ability to develop their critical thinking skills. Freire argues that this type of education makes students passive observers of life. He also asserts that paternalistic, authoritarian education destroys the kind of critical reflection that facilitates the discovery of knowledge.