In disputes, truth is born … and low self-esteem for losers. There is no 100% method of absolute victory in disputes, debates and debates. In a fundamental scientific dispute, the one whose argumentation is more convincing is right, but it often happens that the dispute does not imply the establishment of a fact necessary for science, but is conducted for the sake of entertainment, on a wave of excitement, for the sake of a bright victory over the interlocutor and his supporters. In such cases, fairly simple techniques will help.
Instructions
Step 1
Believe that you are right. The key to winning a dispute is the conviction of your own position. Of course, there are irrational outlooks on life (for example, nationalism or loyalty to football teams), which are supported only by subjective assessments and a categorical rejection of alternative views. With these starting points, a dispute most often implies a conflict. If mutual handicap is not planned, consider your credo. How familiar are you with the subject of the dispute? Are you ready to timely adjust the evidence toolkit? And if it turns out that the enemy is better prepared, do you have enough time, desire and energy to search for new arguments? Start arguing only at maximum "combat readiness".
Step 2
Rely on a support group. Having supporters, advisors and sympathizers with similar views is essential to winning. They can be present at the dispute personally or be implied equally for both parties when the dispute goes one-on-one. The team will support, help, show, give a feeling of elbowing, cheer up, catch up with fear in the opponent. However, it is important to remember that arguments with reference to the masses, such as "This is a well-known fact …" or "This is clear to everyone …", is unconvincing.
Step 3
Listen and let the opponent speak. While your opponent speaks, he loses strength. On the contrary, you have additional time to collect your thoughts and look at the vulnerabilities in his argumentation. The ability to listen, and listen attentively, not only helps to navigate and respond quickly to the opponent's feeds, but also relaxes him. An empathetic listener gives the impression of being willing to agree. But you know when to throw the main shot!
Step 4
Do the opposite and seize the initiative. Does your opponent raise his voice? - Do not urge him to change his tone, speak quieter and calmer yourself. Using swear words? - Remain emphatically polite and correct. Whispers to make your intonations seem defiant, and any line looks like an attempt to interrupt? - Shut up and let him talk, then, collecting all your composure, continue to defend your position. Controlled dissimilarity drives opponents out of themselves, since a person, while convincing, subconsciously focuses on emotional responses. The lack of such responses means that the persuasion fails and creates confusion.
Step 5
Offer compromises. An uncompromising party to the dispute is a candidate for losers. The timely proposed "middle solution" allows you to look at the dispute and the disputants from the outside, take a break and either finish the debate with dignity, or leave the battlefield painlessly. It is also important to remember that compromises are not always mutually beneficial. It happens that, in the eyes of an outside observer, the one who agreed to a draw loses.
Step 6
Consider the subject of the dispute from different angles. Verification of algebra by harmony or geometry by botany helps to build your own system of original proofs. The opponent, on the other hand, may not only be not ready for a comprehensive consideration of the topic, but also simply not understand some area of knowledge the way you understand it. It is easier to win by translating the controversy into a channel that is convenient for you.
Step 7
You're kidding! A well-timed aphorism, a play on words, a funny quote will help to reduce the degree of tension in the dispute, as well as (see steps 2 and 6) attract supporters and change the direction of the dispute.
Step 8
Remember where you started. If you record on paper or any dispute that lasts more than 3-5 minutes, it will be easy to notice that the participants have deviated significantly from their original settings. By returning the opponent to the starting positions, you can completely confuse him, confuse him, reasonably point out that his belief system turned out to be only an escape from evidence and, as a result, win.
