Provocative questions can be asked both from the audience and in person. Usually their goal is to discourage, make you feel confused, and in an argument they often serve as weapons to validate their point of view and overwhelm the opponent. Are there any effective ways to counter this?
One commonly used confusion technique is a personal question, such as, "Was it true that you were a poorly performing student in school?" Such a question baffles and forces one to justify oneself, because to recognize oneself as a poor student means to lower one's authority. Even if this question is initially false, and you really studied with only A's and received a red diploma, the very attempt at justification casts doubt on the competence in solving some problems. To prove that “I am not a camel” is always unprofitable. And the provocateur, having gained his advantage, calms down and continues to pursue his own line. You can think of a lot of such questions, they can be ridiculous, inappropriate and even vulgar, and this does not bother the provocateur.
Then everything depends on the ability to behave. You can get out of this situation in the simplest way: strictly look at the provocateur, wait a short pause, and then continue talking about your topic. This technique kills two birds with one stone - firstly, you did not begin to make excuses and lose credibility, and secondly, you exposed the provocateur as a person who is not worthy of responding to him. Usually this technique allows you to besiege him.
In addition, any uncomfortable question can be turned into a joke. This takes away the essence of the injection and adds credibility to you. For example, the ill-wisher shouts out: "You are talking complete nonsense." Pause. He already anticipates your confusion and desire to justify yourself. And ask him with a question to the question: "How do you know my aunt?" He will most likely begin to grumble that he does not know any aunt, that you are translating a topic, etc. And then you show your cards: "She criticized me for a long time with these very words."
You can make several of these blanks and use them if you have a difficult meeting. They can be used not only for a large audience, but also in a closer circle and even one-on-one.
The meaning of provocative questions is more psychological. Therefore, you can easily neutralize them if you turn the focus of attention to the questioner himself and reveal his negative motivation. This technique is skillfully used by our president. Once he was asked an uncomfortable question at a press conference, to which he replied that, of course, he understands that the person who asked the question supports the interests of his newspaper, which is financed by this and that, and their aspirations are quite understandable …”. After such an introduction, the acuteness of the question immediately subsided, and then one could calmly answer on the merits, or divert the reasoning in the other direction.
Another variation of this technique is to draw attention to the personal motivation of the provocateur. For example, you might say, "I understand that you want to assert yourself in this way, but now is not the time for that." Such an answer will almost always be to the point with provocative questions, since their authors really assert themselves and, if successful, enjoy their superiority. If it turns out to indicate this motivation, the entire severity of the attack will be leveled and then the attacker himself will be discouraged.
In the case of using any methods of neutralizing provocative questions, calmness and composure are of great importance. If you calmly meet a sharp question, then it turns out to neutralize it much easier than in the case when it really hurts and serious excitement appears. This is given with practice and not immediately.
And one more trick is to change the context of a sensitive issue. The essence of a provocation is to put you in an unfavorable light not with the help of a fact, but with the help of your attitude to this fact. If we go back to the question of a poor student, then you can feel ashamed that academic performance was low, or you can feel pride that many great people did poorly in school, but this did not prevent them from achieving success. It all depends on the attitude to this fact.
For example, if you are told that as a person with such low academic performance at school, he can occupy such a responsible position, then you can answer: “I am very glad that I can at least to some extent feel my involvement in great people who did not study well. at school, for example, to Albert Einstein."
Or another question: "You were also a member of the party you are criticizing now?" Answer: "I just entered it in order to learn in practice all its negative sides."
Summing up, we can say that there are effective ways to neutralize provocative issues. It only takes some practice to learn them.
