It is a rare characteristic to be absolutely uninterested in the judgment and opinions of your fellow man. (Those fortunate few are either psychotic, vain, or completely comfortable and confident with themselves. You can judge for yourself where most fall in this spectrum.) Otherwise, humans always try to find some agreement to feel reassured that our own opinions and thoughts are cogent and accurate with others' perceptions. As a result, we discuss, argue, and debate.
We all know someone who loves to win debates. They'll stop at nothing to win a point in a debate. They are very manipulative, and unfortunately we often can be manipulated by these tactics. It takes great effort to develop an understanding, but it can be worth that effort.
Part of what confounds understanding of each other has to do with language and debate tactics. Personally, we strive to speak as clearly as possible about a subject and avoid digressions which would muddle everything. These master debaters, they will try everything to win, and there are some tactics which we'd like to illuminate and discuss.
People, like cattle, run in herds of similar quality. Their opinions are true, and they need only turn to a fellow nearby to be reassured. Under those circumstances, you could debate, employ logic, and scream until apoplexy, and the recipient of your efforts will only low or bleat whatever contradictory nonsense similarly lowed and bleated by his peers. Cattle diverging from the herd get cut down by predators. When you can distract a "perfectly normal beast" and he's a particularly smart animal, you might be able to begin some basic discussion and here are some standard, instinctual responses.
(1) State complete contradictions using large words and without blinking.
Don't be distracted by this one. Large words are often a shield for the ignorant. If you re-word the contradictions in smaller words in a commonsense colloquialism you might be able to hit a human response.
(2) Re-define large words to suit your meaning.
As stated in (1), large words can be used by the ignorant in their hope that you equal their ignorance. When you show a clear understanding of the definition, they'll devolve the discussion to word definitions and stop actually discussing the idea at hand. Don't be diverted. Reduce the conversation to small words and hope you don't have to worry about the definition of "is".
(3) Make use of experts, statistics, and other "well-known" facts to support the position.
The beast is calling back to his herd for help. It's hard to come prepared with enough facts to combat other facts. Unfortunately, facts don't do the job; you need to interpret your facts. As a result, you use your experts to fight his experts. This doesn't work. Don't let it get this far. Use every day experiences and translate the idea.
(4) Attack anyone of value who is the foundation of the opposing side.
Ignore these attacks as though they didn't happen. If you respect someone and their judgment, don't let it show!
Remember, the key to good debate is not obliteration, but understanding. If your opponent begins to exhibit signs of slash-and-burn-win-at-all-costs tactics, it may be a signal that intelligent debate is not possible, and the situation becomes axiomatic. "Never debate a fool for the audience won't know who he is."
No comments:
Post a Comment