Correct debate. How to argue correctly: what polemics are and the basic rules of any dispute. What's non-negotiable

Arguments don't have to be offensive, but if you don't deliver them well, they can become so. Fortunately, there are several techniques that can help you defend your point of view without turning the argument into a real battle. The ability to argue rationally and calmly is actually a real art, and besides, it can be very useful to you in a variety of situations. This skill will give you the confidence to stand up for yourself and defend your opinions. But don’t get too carried away with such discussions—some things are better left undiscussed!

Steps

Part 1

Optimistic Dispute Management

Play the game fairly. Let's say you know exactly how to manipulate another person, but it is important not to give in to this urge if you want to have an honest argument. Decide that no matter how upset he or she makes you, you will not say something that crosses the line.

Respect the other person. Respect what he says. The argument must be two-sided, if you fail to look at this argument from the other side, your opponent will return to this argument and will not listen to you. Of course, it’s great to refute your opponent’s opinion, but refusing to listen to him during an argument is simply stupid.

• You should always treat the other person with respect when arguing with them. Remember that he is the same person as you. Treat others the way you want to be treated. You shouldn’t immediately challenge someone else’s opinion just because it doesn’t agree with yours. Listen to your opponent and his arguments.

1. Try to challenge opinions and ideas without somehow connecting it with the person himself. When you argue with someone, you must remember that you are only arguing an opinion and not trying to humiliate the person. This means that in no case should you call a person stupid just because he thinks differently, and you should also not get personal or in any way affect the appearance of your opponent.

   Admit if you're wrong. When you make a mistake, don't be afraid to admit it. Do not deny that you did not understand something or understood it, but in a different sense. Mistakes do not make you worse, but the ability to admit these mistakes makes you a real person.

   Apologize if necessary. If you have offended someone with your argument or opinion, be kind enough to ask for forgiveness. Act like adults and be prepared to take responsibility in the situation.

   Be open to new ideas. The best way to maintain an optimistic tone is to be open and friendly. You don't want to get your argument wrong again, do you? Open yourself up to thinking differently and don't resist new ideas and points of view.

   Part 2

   Argue convincingly

   1. Make the person feel intelligent. When you make a person feel stupid, they withdraw into themselves and start making stupid, empty arguments. Make your opponent feel smart, and then you will have the opportunity to turn his arguments in your favor.

      Provide arguments and evidence according to the audience you are targeting. It is important that your data is from reliable sources. Reliable sources and truthful arguments about the subject of the dispute - the simplest and effective way win the argument. In addition, it is very important to adapt this evidence to convey it to your opponent, to make it more logical or, conversely, emotional (depending on what is closer to your opponent).

      Pay attention to logical errors and inaccuracies. If you find a logical flaw or inconsistency and point it out to your opponent, you will likely be able to influence his or her opinion. It can be quite difficult to learn to recognize logical errors, but here are a few of the most common ones:

      • Make sure that the arguments are structured and that the cause-and-effect relationship is not broken. For example, cases of autism have increased due to the use of cell phones. Thus, we can conclude that the risk of autism increases with the use of mobile phones. In this case, you may notice that the argument and conclusion follow the pattern “because A precedes B, therefore A causes B.”
      • Another common misconception is the idea that something cannot exist unless there is evidence for it. For example, when you are told that God/microorganisms/evolution/aliens do not exist because we have never seen or physically felt them.
      • The next situation: when the conclusion and conclusion have nothing to do with the argument itself. For example: “We can’t raise teachers’ salaries because police officers and firefighters don’t make that much money either.”

   2. Allow your opponent to become the hero or the victim for a while. People love to think of themselves as the protagonist of their life story. Let your opponent think so, and you act very carefully and push him to change his opinion by discussing the details of the problem.

      • For example: “I know that you really really want to help people. You are one of the most generous people I know. But if you really wanted to help, you wouldn't donate to charity centers that might misuse your funds. Don’t you want to know that your money is directly saving someone’s life?”

   3. Enrich your speech. When you get into an argument, try not to get personal and avoid the words “I” and “you”. Say the word “we” instead. This way, your opponent will begin to perceive you and him as a single entity with common interests and goals, and not as enemies.

      Know when to stop. Sometimes it happens that your opponent is not ready to change his mind right now in front of you. In this case, the best decision would be to simply step back and give your opponent time to think about everything you said and reconsider his point of view. Of course, in some cases you also need to be persistent. This is an art in which you need to experiment.

      • In general, if your opponent seems really, really upset, you may not want to continue the argument any longer.
      • You can close the topic with the argument: “Okay, I understand that I can’t change your point of view, but just think about my words, please.”

   Part 3

   Be smart

   1. Don't provoke an argument. By challenging someone's opinion, you become an initiator, and this is noticed by the people with whom you argue. People won't take you seriously anymore because they know you just need to shout and argue with someone a little. If you want the argument to be useful and interesting, you shouldn’t start it just because of some little thing.

      Be sincere. Allow others to see you for the person you are. This way, you will appear more sympathetic and less selfish and aggressive towards the people you argue with. Just explain why you hold your opinion and be prepared to defend your own point of view rather than being the devil's advocate by trying to justify an idea that is not popular.

      Don't change the topic. Most quick way to make the argument completely meaningless - to move away from its topic. When you are having a discussion, try not to go off topic and return to it if your opponent begins to deviate from the topic. Coming to one single disagreement is better than disagreeing with each other in 20 various issues. Discuss only one topic per argument and talk about everything related to it. When you agree on an opinion, or the argument reaches a dead end, move on to the next topic.

      • Don't let your opponent change the subject. Perhaps the opponent will realize that he is mistaken and will want to change the topic of the dispute. When people are refuted in an argument, many of them try to somehow hide their mistake rather than admit it. If a person refuses to admit his mistake, he confronts you with the following argument: “It’s not important” or “Well, so be it, but this is my opinion,” and so on. Or the person directly says that he admits his mistake.

   2. Explain, explain, explain! Tell us why you are so confident in your point of view, how you reached it, how you came to your conclusions. This may lead to misunderstandings, but it may also influence your opponent's point of view and he will begin to agree with your reasoning. This is a pretty effective way to win arguments with people older than you!

   3. Don't try to make sure you have the last word. Of course, both opponents want to end the dispute and have the last word in it, but this can quickly lead the dispute to a dead end. Don't try to turn the discussion into a bottomless pit. In this case, just agree that everyone will have their own opinion and calm down.

      • If you've been arguing for a long time and neither of you has budged. dead place, consider that today is simply not your day. In fact, there are some arguments that are difficult to refute (no matter how true or valid your arguments are). Especially if your opponent is unwilling to rethink his point of view. If you control yourself and stop the argument in time, you can still maintain a normal relationship.
   • Your argument should be weighty and not aggressive if you are having an ordinary reasonable argument. Fighting differs from arguing in that in arguing, an argument is usually presented to solve some problem in order to choose the true solution, but in fighting, people give arguments to humiliate the other person.
   • Be kind and friendly towards other people. We are all different, and everyone has their own opinion.
   • Remember that people can be good friends even if they have different views on things.
   • Don't try to invent anything, just say it as it really is.
   • If you are wrong, admit it.
   • Sometimes each of us needs to spend a few minutes alone to think about what was said in a conversation. This is completely normal. If your opponent asks you to leave him for a few minutes, agree on a time and continue the discussion a little later. If you feel you need some time to think, politely tell your opponent so.

   Warnings

   • Sometimes it is better not to argue about political and religious topics (only if you are close enough to the person and know that he respects your opinion). Many people disagree on such issues.
     • If you are having an argument with an intelligent person, you can calmly discuss some political topics. However, it will be more difficult to reach agreement on religious issues because the risk of “losing” or “winning” the argument is high.

Today we'll talk about how to stop arguing with people both in real life and online. Many people experience a painful, uncontrollable desire to prove that they are right. Participation in disputes does not bring them satisfaction, but they cannot stop themselves from participating in a heated and meaningless discussion in those moments when someone does not agree with their point of view.

And I was no exception to such people.

My hardest vice

Each person has his own “severe” shortcomings, which are the most difficult for him to cope with. One of my complex vices has always been an uncontrollable desire to argue, to dominate any discussion, to insist on the correctness of my opinion.

I must say that it was much easier for me than to stop constantly participating in disputes. (Don’t be surprised that I compare bad habits with some character traits. I don’t see much difference between addiction narcotic substances(nicotine) and uncontrollable desires in the sphere of personality traits. In both cases, we are dependent on some kind of emotions, that is, we are dealing with some kind of addiction. And it’s not so important how we get these emotions: through cigarettes and drinking, or by participating in an argument, showing impulses for self-affirmation, etc.)

I really “loved” taking part in disputes, mainly on the Internet. I couldn’t just leave the discussion if there were still some people who disagreed with me. These disputes aroused in me anger, aggression, acute rejection of someone else’s point of view, and irritation. It really felt like an addiction. While I was in the middle of the debate, I did not notice anything around me. I could forget about food, I could be late for work only because I was very carried away in an argument with some person whom I don’t know, have never seen and, most likely, will never see.

When I finally left the computer, my whole mind was busy thinking of more clever and skillful ways to defend my point of view and attack the opinion of my opponent. Arguments took a lot of emotional strength out of me, but did not lead to anything. I stuck to my opinion, my opponents stuck to theirs. What was left was just wasted time and a lot of unpleasant emotions.

But I didn’t immediately realize that I was dealing with a harmful addiction. For a long time I thought that I was really doing something useful and important when I proved on some forum that I was smarter than everyone else and that my opinion on some problem was correct, while everyone else was wrong.

The understanding that this was a problem, that this was my shortcoming, came much later.

Exposing the flaws

If we compare the tendency to argue with other vices, for example, an exaggerated sexual need or alcohol addiction, we can say that the desire to prove one’s rightness everywhere is not as destructive as the other above-mentioned vices. It does not lead to major health problems and does not often destroy families. But, it is true, in some respects, it is even worse than many other human weaknesses.

For example, lust, an inflated need to have sex, cannot be completely satisfied. A “sexaholic” is constantly looking for opportunities to have sex; he experiences an irresistible desire. This desire cannot be completely satisfied: its implementation leads only to short-term satisfaction, after which “craving” arises again.

And the more often he has sex, the stronger this craving, the greater the measure of his dissatisfaction. I want to say that in such a picture there is much less happiness and joy than many people might think. The state of eternal search for a new partner is state of constant dissatisfaction with short intervals of satisfaction. Yes, such a person feels happiness and satisfaction during sex and for a short time after it. But at other times he is in search of ways to satisfy his desire and experiences constant fear at the thought that he could not do this.

A “argument addict,” unlike a “sexaholic,” has almost no short breaks for satisfaction! If you yourself are susceptible to such addiction, then you will easily understand this. Just ask yourself, at what points in the argument are you happy and satisfied? Let's look at the entire possible chain of events. I propose to give an example of a dispute on the Internet; such an example, in my opinion, will be more illustrative. Although its conclusions also apply to disputes in real life.

Imagine that someone did not agree with your opinion, you experienced irritation and an urgent need to defend your point of view. You write a response to your opponent. You wrote it. Are you satisfied? No, you were frozen in tense anticipation of what he would answer. You are afraid that he will not accept your arguments and will put forward new ones, and then again you will have to prove something to him.

You visited the forum several times, stopping what you were doing, and checking the answers. The fifth time you refreshed the web page, you found that you had received an answer and immediately rushed to read it! Come on, what's there? He doesn't agree! (What were you really hoping for?) He argues with your arguments, not considering them serious! And now you feel the “need” to defend yourself again!

You answer him, then he answers you, then you answer him again. The debate is heating up! The opponents have already moved from discussing an abstract problem to discussing each other's personalities. Each of them cannot stop, because in this the main participant in the dispute is wounded pride debate representatives. Nobody agrees with anyone. Everyone talks about their own things without understanding the other. Your opponent has finally had enough of it. He left one last caustic comment and disappeared. You realized that he would not argue anymore. You feel relieved: “Finally it’s over! I don't need to argue anymore!

This feeling is as if someone has given you permission not to continue this tedious process and not to receive unpleasant emotions further. Until this moment, no matter how funny it may sound, it seemed to you that you were obliged to defend yourself and you had no choice to stop it.

But do you feel satisfied? No. Your opponent does not share your point of view. And in the process of communication, he managed to insult you and disagree with your opinion on some other issue. This causes new wave frustration and dissatisfaction. The degree of misunderstanding between you only increased.
Can you find satisfaction and contentment with yourself in this chain? No. The morbid tendency to take part in arguments is the kind of drug that does not bring even short-term pleasure.

(I wrote above that I “loved” to argue. I put this word in quotes because there was no love. There was only irritation, frustration and dependence.)

The moment you argue, you experience an unconscious belief that you are moving towards some goal, internal or external. Either you will come to a resolution of some issue in the dispute in your favor, or you will achieve moral satisfaction associated with self-affirmation. But neither one nor the other, as a rule, happens.

It may seem to some that I write about this at quite a length and in detail and am in no hurry to move on to practice. But I believe that before you can cope with a vice, you must first see the vice in it. Understand him. And not to deceive yourself about him, as I deceived myself for a long time. Since I have suffered greatly due to this weakness, I want to analyze it carefully.

But it is not always enough to expose a shortcoming in order to get rid of it. After I realized that arguing was a painful habit of mine, I still didn’t stop doing it right away. I tried to stop myself when I got involved in arguments again, I told myself that debate would not give me anything, that I did not have to prove that I was right to every random person. But it almost didn’t work out for me from the beginning. The passion to argue was stronger than me for some time.

Fighting temptation

When I made this site, one of my main demons began to tempt me more often. I wrote my ideas on the site, and, naturally, people did not always agree with them and wrote (and continue to write) about it in the comments. This was not the neutral territory of some forum, but my site and my personal ideas, to which I became very attached. That's why I found it very difficult not to get involved in arguments. Moreover, some comments seemed frankly offensive to me; I believed that I simply could not afford to pass by and not “teach a lesson” to the offender. Therefore, I scolded myself for this, but for some time I could not help myself.

This is the reason you didn't see this article earlier. I decided to write it only when I began to make significant progress in getting rid of my “favorite” vice. I started leaving some critical comments without response. Believe me, at the beginning it was very difficult for me, since I always considered it my duty to convince a person that he was wrong and I was right!

I began to simply delete comments that were offensive, without getting involved in retaliatory insults. I left the answers of some participants who disagreed with me on the site, but I simply did not answer them if I saw that the person was in the mood to argue rather than listen. Sometimes I saw that someone simply misunderstood my article and, therefore, none of us would benefit from this dialogue.

Of course, I still started to get involved in some kind of controversy, but I came out of it as soon as I realized that there was no point in continuing this discussion.

I can’t say that I have become completely under control of this vice. But what happened was, in my opinion, great success and progress towards getting rid of this weakness. I felt much freer from this habit! As if I no longer have to prove anything to anyone!

So now I can write this article in which I will tell you what exactly helped me achieve this.
But for now, let me tell you a little more about disputes on the Internet and about the biological preconditions for the emergence of the need for disputes in humans. I really love the topic of controversy, which is why I am writing such a long introduction.

Holyvars

The modern network is replete with forums and thematic communities in which everyone can express their opinion, and any other person can disagree with this opinion. Online communities create fertile ground for heated debates to arise about which computer is better, which religion is more correct, which political beliefs are the truest, etc. The Internet makes it possible for people of different ages, views, religions, and characters to come together. Even within the framework of convinced supporters of any one belief system, different opinions can exist and, as a result, disputes can break out.

Internet controversy different people with each other reached such a scale that the unofficial term “Holivars” was coined for them. This word is derived from English words“holy” and “war”, that is, “holy war”. In my opinion, this is a very witty and ironic term.

A person can sit in front of a computer for hours, prove that he is right, not notice anything around him, and forget about his natural needs. It’s as if he is giving himself up with complete dedication and self-sacrifice to the holy war against enemies who are encroaching on the Holy Truth about the indisputable, undoubted superiority of, say, the iPhone over other phones! It seems to him that this is his sacred mission, personally entrusted to him by the supreme paladin of the Shining Apple - Steve Jobs!

The importance that people place on online debate stands in stark contrast to the sheer pointlessness of the process. Each side gets nowhere, they just waste their time trying to prove to other people something they will never accept. And even if they do accept it, what good will it do? But, meanwhile, a lot of time is sacrificed to this senseless need, which more useful could have been spent on something else.

Of course, not all disputes are an absurd battle between “blunt ends and sharp points”; in some disputes, the truth is actually “born” and its participants are enriched with new knowledge, exchanging it with each other.

Also, not all disputes occur between strangers on the Internet about which is better: iPhone or Samsung (Of ​​course Samsung, there’s nothing to argue about. Just kidding! =)). You may argue with a loved one about some really important things, for example, your relationship. But you cannot come to any decision, since the pride of both participants is affected in this dispute.

In this article I will try to talk not only about how to get rid of the need to prove your case in meaningless debates, but also about how to make the debate productive.

Genealogy of the dispute

From the point of view of certain directions of evolutionary psychology, the need to defend one's opinion was supposed to help people at the dawn of mankind. Whoever of our ancestors was the most stubborn and convincing in defending his opinion achieved higher social status than other members of their tribe. Millions of years ago there was no Internet. And therefore, any dispute had much more meaning for a representative of an ancient society than for a representative of a modern society.

After all, all those people with whom I could enter into an argument ancient man, were familiar people, members of the community in which he himself was a member. The person maintained constant interaction with these people. And his life greatly depended on how these people perceived him. Now you can discuss on a forum with a person from Australia about which video card for a computer will be better, each insisting on his own.
Most likely, you will never see each other and your conversation will not have any meaning for anyone. But in ancient times, every word meant something within a close circle of social interaction.

I believe there is another reason why evolution needed to make us argumentative. At that time there were no abstract philosophical ideas, or material things that did not have an obvious practical application(nature, when she created us this way, did not yet “know” that there would be the Internet and iPhones). And if there was a dispute, it concerned things important for survival. How to properly cut meat so as not to get poisoned? Which direction did the mammoth tribe go to the South or North?

“The mammoth tribe went South! I was there today and saw it myself! Why do you say that it is in the North? You weren't there today! Maybe mammoths were in the North yesterday, but now it is in a different place! We won’t listen to you and will go South!”

The principle of survival was beneficial for a person to defend his point of view if he was confident in it. Therefore, nature has equipped the human individual with biological mechanisms that “force” him to argue and prove his own rightness.

But a lot of time has passed since these mechanisms were created. Strong metamorphoses have occurred in the environment of life and in human culture. But genetically man has not changed much. Those ancient impulses that forced us to argue about mammoths are still alive in us. But within the framework of modernity, these impulses themselves cause problems, which I know firsthand. Next, I will tell you exactly what will help you argue less and make arguments productive.

1. Give yourself time

Sometimes our wounded pride and violated sense of justice require that we begin to argue at all costs and prove that we are right, ignoring all the arguments that common sense suggests. As an “argument junkie,” I am well aware of how the Ego quickly bypasses all reasonable arguments and whispers to me: “come on, explain to him, this is very important!” Show him! You need to restore justice!”

There is no use arguing with the Ego; you just need to ignore it for a while. Before you answer, give your pride a rest. Try to relax and not think about the subject of the dispute. Count 10 deep breaths of equal duration, and then ask yourself, do you need this debate?

Even if you end up arguing anyway, taking a break will at least give you the opportunity to remain calm in a tense discussion, not get caught up in the moment's emotions, and perhaps arrive at a productive conversation. This advice is more applicable to disputes on the Internet, but there is nothing wrong with taking a time out in real life: “Right now we are both experiencing strong emotions. Let’s calm down a little and then continue this conversation.”

During this breather, you can try to understand the enemy's position and run through the possible chain of events in your head. This will allow you to avoid tedious, unnecessary discussions or come to a shared understanding through meaningful conversation. More on this in the following paragraphs.

2. Try to understand the other person's position.

In heated disputes, “opponents” are not at all interested in achieving any kind of mutual understanding and reaching a consensus. When a person begins to get carried away by an argument, he becomes in a position of defending his opinion and attacking the opinion of his opponent.

No matter how strange it may sound, no one wonders who is actually right. When you listen and read the arguments of your debate opponent, first of all, you look for logical contradictions and weaknesses in them and, at the same time, try to “strengthen” your own opinion with new arguments. You find allies in an argument who agree with you but disagree with your “opponent” to make your arguments more convincing. This is attack and defense.

As a result, discussion turns into a game. In it, the tasks of joint discovery of truth and productive exchange of ideas retreat to last plan. And the first priority is to “out-argue” a person who disagrees with you, without disdaining any rhetorical devices.

But you don't always realize that you're playing a game for everything. To yourself you seem to be a bearer of objective knowledge, an impartial judge. And you think that it is only your opponent who is characterized by bias, emotionality, illogical conclusions and inconsistency. In fact both sides become biased, some more, some less. And the more emotions and personal preferences are affected in a dispute, the more bias there is in it, the more it begins to resemble a game.

Even if you are really right and try to be as objective as possible, all the same, when you start to defend yourself, you often stop noticing the sound grain in the opponent’s arguments and the weaknesses of your own argumentation.

Productive dialogue between people gives them a chance to learn something from each other, understand themselves more deeply (after all, this can be done through other people's opinions about our views), pay attention to their own shortcomings and become better. But when we turn dialogue into a game, its value and meaning disappear.
Someone might object to me: “So maybe there’s nothing wrong with making a game out of a discussion if this game is exciting and interesting?”

A game only makes sense when there are winners and losers. But as for disputes, especially disputes on the Internet (holivars), there are no winners. Either side is a loser! Although, of course, the exception may be some kind of debate with strictly regulated rules and judges who judge the participants. But even victory in such debates, in my opinion, is quite doubtful. Because, it seems to me, dialogue should be aimed at finding the truth, and not at self-affirmation.

So before you start arguing, ask yourself the following questions:

1. Do I understand my opponent's position?
   (What is my opponent’s position? What are his main arguments? Can these arguments be fair? They may not be suitable for all cases, but in some situations they turn out to be correct?)
2. Does my opponent understand my position?
   (Is he ready to conduct a dialogue with me or did he come only to impose his point of view? Or maybe I myself did not formulate my own opinion very clearly, so he misunderstood me?)
   How is my position different from his? (You need to understand where you agree and disagree with your opponent so that you don't have a pointless argument about things that you actually agree on)
3. Could my opponent be right?
   (Why does my opponent think so? Is there at least some truth in his words? After all, he doesn’t just say or write this, which means he is sure of it. Why is he so sure of it?)
4. Could I be wrong?
   (How confident are you that you are right? How is this rightness confirmed? Are the things on the basis of which you consider yourself right obvious to all participants in the discussion?)

When you ask yourself these questions and answer them, then perhaps the need to argue will disappear by itself. There are the most different situations. I will list some of them.

For example, you will realize that your opponent simply does not understand your position and perhaps does not want to understand. Then what is the point of explaining something to him when he is not going to listen to you, but only wants to conduct his monologue?

I often encounter this situation on my website. Some people even try to argue not with me, but with their own understanding of my articles, which may not at all relate to the meaning that I intended in them. Perhaps they did not read the articles carefully, but simply came to argue. In this case, I don’t waste time simply paraphrasing the article for that person in an attempt to convey to him what I meant (there are exceptions, if the person needs help, then I try to help him and explain something again).

But sometimes I understand that I really didn’t explain something quite accurately, which is why incorrect conclusions were born.

In another situation, you will see that your opponent is right in some way. Only he exaggerates the significance of his own ideas, elevates arguments that are correct in a particular case to the rank of general and universal truth. There is no point in arguing with his ideas themselves.

Even if the discussion gets heated, this analysis will at least give you a break and come to a better understanding of the other person's opinion.

Of course, you shouldn’t hope too much that you will be as honest as possible with yourself. Perhaps your Egos and hurt pride will not allow you to do this. You will convince yourself that your opponent is just stupid and there is no point in arguing with him. It may not be true, but it will save you from wasted time.

3. Weaken your opponent's defenses

Imagine that you blame your husband for not spending enough time with your children. Let's say you do this in an emotional and a little rude manner. He, being offended by your rudeness, begins to defend himself and blame you in return, even if your reproaches were fair. You become even more offended and, in order to take revenge on the offender, you recall to him some other old guilt. And gradually the dispute turns into a scandal.

I think many of us are familiar with this vicious circle in which both debaters find themselves. The more pride and emotion there is within the dispute, the more both participants move away from understanding each other. Everyone talks only about their own things and refuses to understand the other.

To prevent this from happening, try not to provoke a defensive reaction from the person to whom you want to explain something. Don't hurt his pride. Don't be offensive. Don't make direct accusations.

Pride is a wall through which the arguments of reason cannot pass. Don't build that wall in front of you!
Neil Fiore in the book "" gives good method, allowing you to start a difficult conversation, but at the same time not hurt the other person’s Ego.

This method helps move from direct accusations to the fact of admitting your own problem. Instead of saying: “You are always rude to me! You are rude! You are behaving incorrectly!”, you need to start the dialogue with the following wording: “I have encountered a small problem. I am greatly offended by your rudeness and I don’t want to hear it. How can we solve it?

In principle, the meaning of the phrase does not change. Only the wording changes. AND this allows you to bypass defense mechanisms personality. Once you've done this, you have a better chance that your words will reach the other person. Even if he does not agree with you, he will not be irritated by the offensive form of accusation addressed to him, and accordingly will not resort to retaliatory insults and will not affect your own protective functions. And then it will be easier for you to understand that perhaps you yourself are wrong.

4. Visualize a possible chain of events in your head.

Before getting involved in any dispute, for example, on the Internet, think about is your opponent ready to listen to you? Perhaps he plans only to impose his opinion and defend it. You will not convince this person of anything! No need to argue with him!

If you still really want to wipe his nose in the argument and crush him with your undeniable arguments, then imagine the real chain of events that will follow your action.

You will answer him, he will answer you, then you will answer him, he will answer you, and so on... Imagine this process in the smallest detail. Consider how much time you will have to spend. Surely this is not the first time in your life that you have been involved in an argument and you know, although you are not aware of this knowledge, that it does not lead to anything, despite the time spent. Both people will receive nothing but negative emotions.

Also, you can ask yourself: “ What will I get from this? Even if I manage to convince someone of something (which most likely will not happen), what will this give me? Will I be able to take away something new and useful for myself from this dispute? Will I be able to enrich my mind and erudition?”

More often than not, you will not get a positive answer to these questions.

When I want to argue with someone, I vividly imagine how long this process will take me, and how dissatisfied I will be with myself because I spent it so stupidly and did not achieve any result. And I immediately lose the desire to argue.

5. Give other people the right to put their beliefs into practice.

This principle really helps me not to get involved in long discussions. If you understand that every person has the right to translate their beliefs into action, then you will want to participate in disputes less. What does it mean? It's very simple. If someone believes that Apple computers are better than PCs, then this person will buy an Apple if he has the opportunity. If someone is sure that articles on a self-development website should be concise and not very detailed, then this “someone” will write short posts if he has a website about self-development. Suppose you do not agree with each of these opinions, so you will buy a PC with which you will begin to publish voluminous posts on your self-development site.

I understand that this sounds terribly banal, even banal stupid. But if we accept the fact that Each person acts according to his own principles or will act this way, if possible, then why argue about these principles with each other?

If I don’t want to argue with someone, I can say: “If you don’t agree that you need to regularly clean your computer from dust, then you won’t clean it regularly from dust. But I will, because I think differently. Why do we need to discuss this?

Of course, you should not abuse this method. If the discussion concerns some important, vital things on which the happiness, health of a person and the people around him depend, then sometimes it is possible to somehow influence this person so that he becomes better. For example, try to prove to him that children should not be treated rudely, that there is no need to drink constantly, even if the person does not agree with you.

Use this method when you realize that an argument will be pointless or when an initially productive conversation has gone too far. This is simply a way to “dodge a bullet”, to stop unwanted emotions, and not to nip any dialogue in the bud.

6. “Perhaps I’ll get around to it someday.”

On Steve Pavlina's website, one of the most famous English-language self-help blogs, its author describes what helps him avoid getting drawn into lengthy arguments with people who disagree with his ideas. He says or writes to them: “Perhaps you are right,” and ends the conversation there.

Maybe it will be useful for someone to know about this method. It does require you to step away from your Ego a little and acknowledge at least the possibility that your views may not be the ultimate truth and the one who criticizes you will probably be right.

But personally, a slightly different setup helps me. I think to myself, “I don’t agree with him right now. But perhaps someday I will come to share his opinion.”

For example, someone tells me that I treat a certain style of music unfairly, calling it simple and mediocre. Maybe so. I'm not ready to agree with this yet. But perhaps someday my (as has happened more than once in my life) and I will not be so critical of such music. Therefore, I will not argue with anyone and prove the opinion that I hold now.

This attitude helps you recognize that the truth you hold is not something static and unchanging. This is a thing that greatly depends on your age, level of development, knowledge, momentary emotions, views and beliefs. All these things can change, so your truth can change too. Acknowledge this, and it will become much easier for you to accept the fact that other people's ideas and views do not coincide with your beliefs. After all, someday everything can change!

7. Be prepared for any reaction

Keep in mind that your reluctance to argue with people may cause them to react strongly. When two people argue, we can say that they mutually satisfy each other's need to argue. To refuse a person who wants to argue, in fact, to argue, is the same as refusing sex to a person when he is already in the mood for it. Naturally this will cause a negative reaction.

Therefore, be prepared to hear something like the following addressed to you:

• “You just have nothing to say. You have no arguments. Haha, I knew I'd be right."
• “Well, are you giving up? Did I show you?
• “When it comes to arguments, you immediately leave!”

Don't pay any attention to this. This is simply an expression of resentment of a person who did not receive what he really wanted. This is his hidden desire to provoke your reaction.

8. Go out when it smells hot.

Remember, it is never too late to get out of an argument, even if you are stuck in it up to your throat. Just finish it. If it happens on the Internet, close the page and don’t open it again in the near future. Don't answer anything. Just stop wasting time and move on.

In real life, you might say, “Sorry, I don't want to discuss this anymore. You and I will come to nothing, but will only get angry. Let's not let any little thing that you and I disagree about come between us."

9. Manage your attention

The above methods will help you avoid unpleasant disputes. But simply “dodge the bullet” and not respond to other people’s provocations is not enough. Sometimes it becomes very difficult to resist the temptation to return to an argument after you have decided not to prove anything to anyone. After all, so many crushing arguments come into your head with the help of which you can still defeat your rivals! Your mind will tell you: “come back, you gave up early, you need to prove to him that he is wrong!”

But don't give in to these impulses! If you decide not to argue, follow your decision to the end. As soon as you think about going back, just turn your attention to something else. Be prepared to repeat this action as many times as you think about returning to the argument. Believe me, you will spend less time “fighting” these thoughts than you will spend on a pointless argument if you get involved in it.

(The word struggle is in quotation marks because there is no particular need to fight any of them. This is a fight without a fight. You just need to learn not to react to them and redirect your mind to something else, every time these thoughts appear. This principle will help you not only in disputes, but also in the fight against addictions, fears, and any annoying thoughts.)

10. Don't get attached to your ideas.

The fear that your ideas and beliefs will be questioned provokes you to fiercely defend your own opinion. But ask yourself this question: “ what happens if I turn out to be wrong?“Will it really be such a big deal if Samsung turns out to be better than the iPhone? Is Canon better than Nikon? Is Mercedes better than BMW?

No, nothing bad will happen and your opinion will not suffer. Stop looking at it as a matter of life and death.

Of course, this principle is more difficult to apply in situations where the subject of discussion is the foundation of your worldview or an important part of it. For example, belief in God or beliefs related to personal development, the emergence of this world, human destiny, etc. If you consider yourself ugly but smart, it will be difficult for you to even think that physical beauty may be more important than intelligence. Because she is attached to the opposite belief.

Difficult, but impossible. You cannot base your self-esteem and your views on some things that may suffer. It must be that in order to achieve such a result, when you do not tie yourself to your ideas, it will take systematic, comprehensive work on personality development, which is what my site is dedicated to. I'm not ready to attribute this result to one thing.

But recently, I began to come to this myself. I stopped worrying so much about my ideas being wrong. Of course, I have no doubt that my site helps someone. My practical recommendations are correct if they work. But when it comes to my views about ideas that are not very relevant to everyday experience, I have become much less worried that they will suddenly turn out to be inaccurate. So so be it.. So this will help me get rid of misconceptions and give me a chance to find the truth. That's it.

And this thought really became liberating for me! I stopped worrying so much about losing my footing. And it gave me the opportunity to listen to other people instead of fiercely defending my beliefs.

But if you are sure that no one can shake your views, then why argue?

11. Accept that not everyone will agree with you.

After all, that's how the world works. People have their own views and refuse to share yours. You will not be able to convince every person that you are right, even if you are sincerely confident that he is mistaken, and your personal experience this only confirms it. People will argue with you, disagree, criticize your ideas. This is the order of things. The only way to avoid this is to say or write nothing at all.

Think about it, so what if someone disagrees with you? Really, so what?

Conclusion

These different methods can be used depending on the circumstances. I use them all in different times. Sometimes I manage to immediately “dodge a bullet” without any extra thoughts ( lately this happens more and more often) sometimes, I have to seek support in these ways and convince myself that I should not give in to my painful habit.

Some of these methods are designed not just to get out of an argument, but also to make the argument more productive. Turn your “opponents” into allies in the search for truth!

But finding a balance between productive dialogue and pointless argument can be difficult. So if you have a serious addiction to arguing, follow the principles of an alcoholic who is trying to quit drinking. “No alcohol in the near future, in any form. Perhaps later, when you learn to control your desires, then you will be able to afford to drink a glass on holidays. But for now it’s best to avoid any temptation.”

Strive to stop the argument completely, even if it seems productive to you, if you have big problems with self-control. But when you train your Ego, you will be able to conduct interesting dialogues, defend your point of view and at the same time not get emotionally involved in the conversation and not cross the line of respect for its participants.

Speaking about training your “I,” I would like to note that even if, when applying these tips in practice, you feel a lot of resistance that prevents you from ending the argument, this does not mean that such resistance will always be there. By systematically and methodically following my recommendations, you will gradually train your Ego, and it will no longer have so much power over you. I feel the truth of these words.

Every day it gets easier and easier for me to cope by one's own desire argue. The main thing is patience. Don’t be too hard on yourself for losing your temper and starting to debate again. Instead, calm down. What happened happened. Think about how you can prevent this from happening in the future.

I re-read these lines and feel how a person who has not experienced such a problem might smile if he reads this. On my website I write about alcohol addiction, panic attacks, etc. These can truly be called problems with a capital P. But I also discuss the topic of this article in detail, methodically and seriously, as one of these problems. "It's just an argument!" Someone will tell! Does this really deserve so much attention? Believe me, he deserves it. For some this may actually be a problem. And that was a problem for me.

Well, now you are well aware of my weakness, which I have struggled with and continue to struggle with. Perhaps after this article someone will want to provoke me to a holivar on the site! Well then! I will be glad to have another reason to train my Ego! (I delete offensive comments =))

6 years ago

Readers of my blog often ask me the question: “how...

7 years ago

In this article I will tell you how you can extract...

In life you have to argue a lot, object, refute the opinions of others, and disagree.

A person shows his good manners best when he leads a discussion, argues, defending his beliefs.

In a dispute, intelligence, logical thinking, politeness, the ability to respect people and... self-respect are immediately revealed.

If in a dispute a person cares not so much about the truth as about victory over his opponent, does not know how to listen to his opponent, strives to “shout out” his opponent, to frighten him with accusations, he is an empty person, and his argument is empty.

How does an intelligent and polite debater conduct an argument?

First of all, he listens carefully to his opponent - the person who does not agree with his opinion. Moreover, if anything is unclear to him about his opponent’s positions, he asks him additional questions. And one more thing: even if all the opponent’s positions are clear, he will select the weakest points in the opponent’s statements and ask again whether this is what his opponent is asserting.

By carefully listening to his opponent and asking again, the arguer achieves three goals: 1) the opponent will not be able to argue that he was “misunderstood”, that he “did not claim this”; 2) the arguer, by his attentive attitude to the opponent’s opinion, immediately wins sympathy among those who observe the dispute; 3) the arguer, by listening and asking again, gains time to think over his own objections (and this is also important), to clarify his positions in the dispute.

In the future, when objecting, you should never resort to unauthorized methods of argument and adhere to the following rules: 1) object, but not accuse; 2) do not “read the heart”, do not try to penetrate the motives of the enemy’s beliefs (“you stand on this point of view because it is beneficial to you”, “you say so because you are like that yourself”, etc.); 3) do not deviate from the topic of the dispute; a dispute must be able to be brought to an end, that is, either to the refutation of the opponent’s thesis, or to the recognition that the opponent is right.

I want to especially focus on my last statement.

If you conduct an argument from the very beginning politely and calmly, without arrogance, then you ensure yourself a calm retreat with dignity.

Remember: there is nothing more beautiful in a dispute than to calmly, if necessary, admit that your opponent is completely or partially right. This way you gain the respect of others. By doing this, you seem to call on your opponent to yield, forcing him to soften the extremes of his position.

Of course, you can admit that your opponent is right only when it comes not to your general beliefs, not to your moral principles (they should always be the highest).

A person should not be a weathervane, should not yield to an opponent just to please him, or, God forbid, out of cowardice, for career reasons, etc.

But to concede with dignity on an issue that does not force you to give up your general beliefs (hopefully high ones), or to accept your victory with dignity, without gloating over the loser in an argument, without triumphing, without offending your opponent’s pride - how beautiful that is!

One of the greatest intellectual pleasures is to follow a debate conducted by skilled and intelligent debaters.

There is nothing more stupid in an argument than arguing without reasoning. Remember Gogol’s conversation between two ladies in “Dead Souls”:
“- Honey, this is colorful!
- Oh no, not colorful!
- Oh, motley!

When the arguer has no arguments, simply “opinions” appear.

We often have to argue with our superiors and colleagues about various issues, and we need to be able to defend our point of view without entering into conflict, and sometimes agree with the opponent’s point of view if yours turns out to be incorrect.

Many years ago I was in psychiatry residency. As always, clinical examinations of patients took place on Mondays. Heated debates often arose during these discussions. It was interesting to watch how venerable psychiatrists picked their picks while discussing the patient’s condition. Sometimes, he breaks into raised voices and thereby provokes conflicts.

But there were others who knew how to argue without entering into conflict. I learned a lot from them.

I remember how I introduced the patient and expressed my diagnosis. My teacher, a professor, politely asked me if there were other diagnostic options? I replied that there were none. He said softly: “Think, Igor Olegovich, don’t rush. What symptoms do not fit your diagnosis and why?

Only later did I understand how important it is to be able to ask the right questions when arguing. Yes, he could have harshly said that I was wrong and given his diagnosis, but he did not do this, trying to push me to a more objective perception of the situation.

We are grateful to our teachers who taught us how to argue with people on the merits without offending the other side or making enemies. Otherwise, people become irritated and sometimes even vindictive, especially in the presence of others, when you rub their nose in their own mistakes.

You may not be forgiven for this. Although, if you are a lover of truth and are not afraid of enemies, believing that decent people should have enemies, then the flag is in your hands!

Learn to manage disputes, if you want, of course, to resolve them constructively, and not turn your life into something like Solovyov’s program “To the Barrier.” But this is a TV show, where the louder the scandal, the better, and the most wonderful debaters are those who are ready to fight. However, such emotions are only good on television. In real life they only get in the way.

So what should you do?

• Questioning (to learn about the opponent's criteria and principles, to clarify ambiguities and check the level of understanding).
• Listen carefully to what your opponent says.
• Based on your opponent's ideas.
• Control your emotions while remaining calm.
• Show both sides of the issue.
• When putting forward a thesis, give arguments.
• Be brief.
• Use clear, simple language.
• Use examples and analogies.
• Involve independent experts, evidence, precedents.
• Express your point of view firmly.
• Criticize a person's arguments, but not the person himself.

Here's what you should never do:

• Go straight to harsh criticism of your opponent.
• Argue, find fault over little things.
• Speak with sarcasm, be “the smartest.”
• Interrupt, trying to seem “the most important.”
• Announce disagreement in advance.
• Be too talkative.
• Use jargon, unclear, ambiguous words.
• Speak abstractly.
• Be irritated, aggressive.

Resume. The fact that people argue is normal, the whole question is in what form. Stick to the rules of argument, and you will be considered an intelligent person.

When you get carried away by an argument, don’t forget that your goal is to get to the bottom of the truth, and not to humiliate your interlocutor. Don’t get personal, don’t allow yourself to make unflattering statements about mental abilities your friend. You should not enter into an argument with a deliberately incorrect opinion and defend your point of view solely for the sake of humiliating your interlocutor. If you are a skilled speaker and can deftly manipulate arguments, you will probably succeed, but doing so will be bad for your reputation.

Precision of wording

Make sure both you and your opponent know the meaning of the terms you are using. Otherwise, by the end of the evening you may find that you have been arguing for several hours, although your opinions coincided.

If you don't understand your opponent's statements, don't hesitate to ask him to rephrase them in other words.

I know that I don't know anything

It's impossible to know everything. Even an erudite person who has reached unprecedented heights in his profession may not know some information that does not concern him. A nuclear physicist can get confused in the chronology of Tsvetaeva’s works, but a brilliant musician can, as they write chemical reactions. If in a conversation with your opponent you find that you have begun to “float” in the topic, honestly admit it and direct the dispute in a different direction. Or look on the Internet for the information you are interested in to continue the conversation that captivates you.

There is no point in arguing about something you have absolutely no understanding of. Eventually it will come to the surface and you will make a fool of yourself.

Cunning opponent

Playing with words is quite easy, especially if the interlocutor is good-natured and somewhat... If you come across a clever opponent, you yourself may not notice how he will turn your words inside out, and in the end he will be right, and you will be wrong. Pay close attention to your opponent's reasoning, and if you notice that he begins to interpret what you said incorrectly, do not hesitate to correct him.

Victories and defeats

You finished arguing, and now it became clear whose opinion was correct, who won and who lost. If you turn out to be right, do not rush to rejoice wildly and demonstrate superiority over your interlocutor in every possible way - this would be wrong. It’s better to thank him for the discussion, tell him that his hypothesis was quite interesting (if this is not flattery). If you lose, do not be offended or show dissatisfaction, but admit that you learned new information from the dispute.