We all love to argue (as is evidenced by the comments on some of the topics on Listverse) but oftentimes an argument ends in a yelling match with insults flying and no conclusion being drawn. Therefore, I have put together this list of tips to help all of us in our future debates – on the site and off. If you take heed of all of my suggestions here, you will be in a much stronger position in future arguments. If you find this list useful, I also recommend you read the book How to Argue & Win Every Time, by Gerry Spence.
When debating you should never raise your voice. You should remain calm at all times. The louder you talk, the louder your opponent talks – and the end result is a yelling match. And of course, it goes without saying that you should definitely not resort to violence. You can even try to talk quieter than normal – as this can draw people in to you and it can make you appear wise. An argument is not won by the person with the loudest voice, it is won by the person with the most compelling arguments.
It is a good idea to try to get your opponent on your side by making statements that you know he agrees with – this puts you in the strong position in the debate. You don’t even need to use a fact relating to your debate – you could, for example, in a debate about the existence of God state “I am sure you agree with me when I say that petrol is overpriced”. As soon as your opponent agrees, you have won a psychological battle. You are no longer the opponent – you are a comrade. This technique is so effective it is used by telemarketers all the time.
It is not a good idea to blatantly tell your opponent that he is wrong – instead you should show that he is wrong through good counter-arguments. Telling a person they are wrong merely annoys them and does nothing for your argument as (at least until you can prove it), it is a subjective comment. Be humble in the debate and show good will – not only will it make you look good if you win, it will show that you are a worthy opponent even if you lose.
Never resort to name calling – even if your opponent does. You must attack your opponent’s argument – not their person. As soon as you begin to criticize your opponent, it becomes obvious that you have run out of ways to defend your view. These types of insults (ad hominem) are a sure way to lose a debate. You should be pleased if your opponent resorts to this feeble attempt to escape the real debate as it means you are close to victory.
When arguing, both parties need to agree on fundamental “truths” to begin with – if you don’t, there can be no debate. What is the point of arguing that the Bible was written by God, when your opponent doesn’t even believe in God? First you should debate the existence of God. If you both agree that He exists, you can then debate the smaller points. If your opponent convinces you that God can not exist, there is little point in arguing about the authorship of the Bible. This is the structure seen in the Summa Theologica by Saint Thomas Aquinas – he starts with the basic points, presents arguments and counter-arguments, and moves on when each point is “proven” by logic.
When a person is beginning to lose an argument, it is quite common to see them try to divert the topic at hand to another – thereby hoping you will not notice their weakness and will get entangled in a whole new debate. When this happens, don’t fall for it. Return to the original topic immediately. Do not give any time to other topics (no matter how tempting it may be) until you have completed the first.
This is the “socratic method”. When your opponent states a “fact” – probe deeper in to the fact with questions that are designed to expose its flaws – these are usually “tell me more” type questions: “can you give me an example?”, “Another way of looking at this is …, does this seem reasonable?”. These questions will invariably lead your opponent to the truth – and if they are honest, they will concede. Unfortunately this is not always the case – I have seen frustrated people depart the debate in anger because they believe you are “trying to trick” them. But don’t worry – this is a win if it happens.
After making a strong argument, let your opponent do all the talking – especially if he lacks the facts to oppose you. He will bluster and fumble – giving you a variety of new weapons with which to attack him. This may not lead to him conceding defeat – but it may lead to him walking away from the debate – a clear victory for you. Many an argument has been won by not arguing at all! As an aside, this is an excellent method for getting your own way – make your request, and when it is declined remain silent. This usually makes the other person so nervous (as no one likes silence) that they may give in just to get out of an uncomfortable situation.
Do not state that something is “true” unless you absolutely know it is – be prepared to prove it if necessary. It is incredibly annoying to debate a topic with a person who is simply making up their argument on the fly. You wouldn’t like it if people did it to you – so don’t do it to others. Only engage in a debate that you know you can win based on facts.
If you have all the facts to back you up, you should be able to win your argument if your opponent is honest. But there will always be times when your opponent gets the better of you and they corner you. When this happens, be a gentleman and concede the win. You should always be graceful in defeat. Nothing is worse than a person who argues simply for the sake of it and absolutely will not give in – no matter how obvious their loss.
Contributor: JFrater
the best way to win an argument…
them: i found the disgusting websites you were looking at.
me: that sounds like something hitler would say.
everybody knows that being compared to hitler because of what you have said means that the argument isn’t going so well for you.
buc,
Spot on. Bluffing has to be like lying. You’re only going to stand any chance of getting away with it by sheer nerve, utter conviction and blithe self-confidence. Once, when I wanted to watch a really important mid-week soccer match, I put my cap on neatly, burttoned up my blazer, clamped a document under my arm and walked purposely out in full view through the school main gates, as used by the masters and people on business. The same tactic worked later in services’ training camp when there was something to avoid. I got a dental chit legitimately and then wandered around in the fog with it along the officers’ walkways, showing it if challenged. Who on the skive would dare do that? So no one bothered to read the small print. We knew of an Aussie surgeon doing the Earl’s Court thing who regularly occupied a Royal Box at the Festival Hall with his friends when it was not in use. He would whisper some powerful establishment name confidentially, the stewards would bow, and usher them in.
Disarming, or sowing doubt can be, as you say, a valuable tactic. We have to go away for longish periods. When we first came here ten years ago, we were desperate to find someone to keep the new garden watered and ticking over. There was this old guy, our Chilean neighbour, don Carlos, nearly 90. Wiry and willing, but … So Anita realised she’d have to spell everything out slowly and carefully, backed up by markers. “Don’t hose water over the seedlings, don Carlos, you’ll wash them out.” “Be careful to dig those out, don Carlos, they’re weeds, and leave those, they’re rare flowers.” He’d eventually repeat all the instructions very carefully by heart with an intelligent gleam in his eyes, and we sank back in relief believing the garden was in safe hands. Then, when we got back, he’d hoed choice bulbs out together with their markers, half of them chopped to bits or missing. And he miraculously managed to do the exact reverse of everything Anita had asked! In desperation, she went round with him groaning, “Oh don Carlos, I asked you not to hose out the seedlings, and you have.” “Yes, señora Anita. You asked me not to hose the seedlings and I have.” “And didn’t I tell you to dig these up and leave those, and you’ve done them the other way round.” “Yes, señora Anita, you told me to dig these up and leave those, and I’ve done them the other way round.” And so on. A word-for-word mantra repetition of everything. What could you say? We kept serious faces until we got indoors and then *****ed ourselves laughing. He won, hands down.
I’m sure the D.C. technique must be applicable to arguing!
astraya,
That must be such a prime source of real life quotes.
Every recalcitrant piece of machinery has been told by me, “I’m giving you one last chance.” followed by, “Right, I warned you. You’ve asked for it” and a thrashing, or a kick, failing a suitable branch or stick to hand. My first wife treasures an episode with a defunct lawnmower and an extremely sore toe. (But not as much as when her husband mowed over a wasps’ nest in short shorts. She slammed the door on me with, “Don’t you dare bring those things in here!” I did say FIRST wife!) I have to admit Fawlty probably kept us together for as long as we were. “I mentioned the war once and I think I got away with it”, was one of our favourites from the same episode you quoted.
good list, funny pictures
maximuzO4 Whatever your doing I want some ! Precision im not sure but I think you insulted me somewhere with your list with #111. Anon @ 113 who told you my debating strategy ? Yall behave out there.
Disc – didn’t think of your clever reply, but yeah, that’s true. I’ll try to be quicker with the comeback with the next woman that occupies my life.
Anon – That picture of the old guy in my head is making me snigger. Good thing you didn’t ask him to clean up the dog crap or take the garbage to the curb.
After all the crapola we slung at each other in the Black President question, I’m beginning to think you’re okeedokee.
“Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
Since when do my comments warrant ‘moderation?’
I’m going to use the age old quip “Don’t you know who I am?”
I’m so offended.
buc -
chill dude. ‘snigger’ probably tripped the filter. or maybe something else did.
yup. was ‘snigger’ cuz put mine into mod too. anyway…all comments onsite now.
alternative word choice could be ‘snicker’
Snigger? A sort of half giggling, half guffaw response to something that one might find humorous or witty?
Or is it something more devious, perhaps a person with a well trained vocabulary and sharp observational skills is being discriminated against?
What if I had chortled or snorted or all out ROTFLOL’ed? What then? A total ban?
Besides, I’m a charter member of this site with a long history of never using inflamatory or incendiary comments or hurled insults at lessor commentators.
Well . . . maybe once or twice.
JK Cyn.
Because of recent unsavory comments, the word “nigger” now gets put in to moderation – I am not banning the word (or words that contain it) – I just want to make sure the word is not being used offensively. I believe it can be used inoffensively.
Oh – and bucslim: I am unable to configure the site to allow registered users to avoid moderation – that is why you got caught – even though you are an old timer on the site
buc -
uh..yeah. for this i delay bedtime…*yawn*
NITE!
Snigger
JF – I completely agree, I just enjoy being a pain in the ass.
Nighty night Cyn, and by the way, ‘snicker’ has peanuts and nooogaut and it satisfies, but it doesn’t make me laugh.
Time for a Sniggers Bar, perhaps? CHOCOLATE!
BTW, there is a forum about “words that sound rude but aren’t”.
buc, (125),
Well you know its not just us. It brought out the worst between you and Randall too, inter alia! Hahaha.
You’ve got a point there. Just as well Anita didn’t instruct D.C. to put the dog crap in the outside bin and the sausages in the fridge. That’s nearly not funny. During another absence we had a massive multi-day power failure, a heat wave and a side of lamb unfrozen in the freezer. Anita’s family came along for a check, had to fight their way through the flies, nearly went arse over tit on the pool of blood and thought we’d maybe taken up a bit of quiet serial killing as a relaxing hobby (Silence of the lamb?). They went back, got gas masks and cleared it all up, which was pretty noble and way beyond the call of duty.
My comment is in for mmoderation Don’t tell me, I know.
buc,
Snickers are Anita’s favourite fattening food. I’ve rather wickedly got her a bit confused over the words snickers and knickers. So it makes me laugh: I have to get my cheap laughs somehow.
Jfr, presumably that old traditional colour description, nigger brown, frequently used for shoe polish, would still classify as innocent. My 1956 vintage dictionary gives a range of descriptions for *the word*, mostly racial, but also quite rightly qualified with “(usu. derog.)” There are a couple of once innocent phrases I would imagine are no longer acceptable and so redundant. I’m particularly smitten though by the “black turnip caterpillar” Ugh!
If you find yourself losing, you can always hit them with a well-placed trout and vanish into a ninja smokescreen. Although I’ve found that mace tends to stop your great escape… XD
homo*****uality is a choice maximuz04,
just like choosing to steal
you may have the urge to steal, as most have sometime in their life, but acting on it…that is your choice
but i suppose my last comment is for another list, another time
I think that someone should inform Bill O Reilly about number 10.
this will be very a very helpful material when coaching debate. i am also a university debater. But since graduating, i’ve been adjudicating and coaching more often. am a woman, have discovered that a better way to deal with frustration during matches is to seduce adjes. little cleavage will go a long way and hey, if you cant use your goodies, i always say, use your partner’s.
Mom424:
Just out of curiosity where did I go off topic? I just used what he/she said as an example. Maximus basically said that ‘homo*****uality not being a choice’ is a fact. When it is, in fact, an opinion. It’s a fact based on opinion…it’s upside down, really.
so, if you become proficient at the skills listed above, will you be a “master debater”?
Anon(138) I tried eating knickers one time – had a hell of a time getting them out of my braces. Now I just stick to snickers and phosphates.
Ok how about this one:
them: i found the disgusting websites you were looking at.
me: i was trying to avoid VD.
maximuz04 (105):
Yeah haha I guess this list just got me in the arguing mood.
Disc – you really destroyed my next post. I was gonna weave that into a reply to kiki. (masterdebater) You are a genius, but now my mortal enemy for stealing my thunder.
Anon – I can’t tell you how I reacted to your “Silence of the Lamb” comment without moderation. That was damn funny though.
psychosurfer – you can get out of that question by saying it came up in a pop up. (in more ways than one)
not a master debater, Disc
…a cunning linguist.
when i lose they state a fact but when i win they think they won even though they dont even make sence.Wat can i do to make them now they lost?
Foohy; You choose to be attracted to the opposite *****? Sorry dear but who you choose to have ***** with isn’t what determines your *****ual orientation, it’s who you WANT to have ***** with. That is hardwired. Ask the millions of men in the 50′s who because of societal restraints pretended to be straight and just had anonymous homo*****ual ***** at every opportunity. Pretending to be something you aren’t doesn’t change who you really are. You’re mistaken.
Callie and Disc,
… or a fella to reckon with?
Bigski (124) – Sorry if my 111 insulted you…I wasn’t directing it at any particular person, animal, vegetable, or mineral. Just some general observsations with no malice intended
Another tactic that works quite well when in a losing argument…yell “look out behind you” then run off when the person turns around
Better yet, don’t argue. It’s usually pointless.
The recent spate of wordplay brings to mind another good arguing or debating tactic of a marginally ad hom. variety.
If you call your opponent a dickhead, you are unlikely to gain the sympathy of onlookers unless he (***** asuumed!) has thoroughly convinced them, or you have thoroughly convinced them of the fact. It won’t gain you extra brownie points under any circumstances. But if you use words to unpick some weak point of your opponent, you may well have your audience in stitches and your opponent with your figurative rapier at his throat. The subtle, witty, ad hom put down.
A politician called Foot or Foote managed to get on the wrong side of a sharp columnist. He therefore found himself written up publicly as *a leg-end in his own time*.
Churchill was a past master at this tactic (his examples probably belong in quotes topics, if not there already). Heckled by a ardent but tedious gangling adolescent with zits, he held up his hand for silence and intoned something like. “I admire a manly man. I adore a wonanly woman. But one thing I simply cannot stand. A boily boy.”
An opposition member called Wilfred Paling stood up in the House of Commons and called Churchill, then Prime Minister, “You dirty dog.” Now Winston could probably have called the rules down on him. But he paused for timing and effect, looked around the expectant House over the top of his glasses, and replied in that famous voice, “Yes. And the Honorable Member should bear in mind what dirty dogs do to palings!”
Churchill is rumoured to have Spoonerised the name of the rigidly uptight, austere Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Stafford Cripps, as Sir Stifford Crapps. But I believe that’s unconfirmed. What a wickedly wonderful ad hom. though!
i shall use this for my future wife LOL
Anon (121)- you seriously cracked me up!!I think I might just have a good day after that…
Ad hominem irks me to no end, as does blatant illogicity. Unfortunately, that tends to render me incoherent with indignant outrage, which is no help to anybody. …well, except for my opponent.
Also:
1) There is absolutely nothing wrong with criticizing or suggesting additions or revisions to a list, as long as it’s done in a genuinely polite manner. It’s a free internet, and I don’t think jfrater has objected to polite criticisms.
2) Lily, your sweeping generalizations based on anecdotal “evidence” serve only to smear our collective reputation.
3) An opinion is an opinion. Now, opinions can be WRONG. But it’s still an opinion. It is only bad form, debate-wise, to attempt to pass opinion off as fact.
These truths should pop up on an internet users screen every time they type in the words “fail” and “moron”.
Not getting into an argument in the first place is a guaranteed winner, barring that, keeping your facts straight and truthful, and your voice low, are remarkably effective. Having the truth on your side is a major plus, and keeping your cool, at all costs, really, really annoys your opponent.
segue, et al.,
I’ve found that no matter how reasonably one person conducts their case, the only civilized arguments with fair and acceptable conclusions result from exchanges between two (or more) equally civilized and respectful opponents. All the rest almost invariable either end in open rage, humiliation, insoluble disagreement, silent frustration, tears, alienation … or all six! How far will you have to look in LV to find classic examples of each? Hahaha.
Of course, a lot also depends how seriously the contestants are taking the subject and each other. Just take a look at this basically good-humoured discussion (given that we dig up Lily first) and the customary heavy stuff going on right now in the more recent Worst Invention topic.
Anon: Very true. I’ll jot down those six so I can respond in future -
(silent frustration)
for example!
162. Anon: I’ve found that no matter how reasonably one person conducts their case…
****
Hence, my first suggestion! “Not getting into an argument in the first place” lol!
astraya (and segue),
Ah, but I forgot (bonus) number seven, the best one of all to end on under those distressing circumstances, which I’m going out on now …
(enigmatic silence)
Walks away in an aura of serene silence, a small smile playing at the corners of my lips.
the no. 1 was truly no. one nice . great once again. Carry on
Great minds. Listverse is awesome since then. Keep it up.
This list was okay. Okay in a very okay way, though most of this stuff is kind of common sense.
‘Yo’-
Why don’t you try speaking with someone who is a homo*****ual before you go and make yourself look like a complete *****, eh?
Hah, what an educational list.
Although I’m sure it will have little or absolutely no effect on some. Attacking is always the easiest way..
Having the last word.
Check out the *last posts* on older LV lists, and you’ll get a good education on that, and will be able to classify them all as follows:
Harmless, non-controversial topics just tend to splutter out with an odd remark or two when no one else has anything to add, and everyone has moved on.
Some lists are killed off by an irrelevant, nonsensical or other *end stop* that nobody is interested in following up. That may be final, or a more or less prolonged pause, when someone either comes in with a similar end stop, or revitalises the topic. Other such bored endings result from long filibustering posts that no one can be bothered to read through (your poster pleads guilty as charged on occasions!). Long, tedious personal spats also drive others away, but they will actually end as one of the following.
The abusive, angry, biased, offensive, aggressive, warped, usually ad hominem last word. However many of those elements it contains, this is almost invariably aimed at one or more fellow LVers, who may have been responding in kind, or have been trying to remain restrained. Occasionally it may be simply a rant against some group or philosophy. Please note how, when not answered, this rapidly loses all its force. The longer it stands, the more irrelevant it appears, and the more vividly it shows up it’s auther for the person he or she is.
The intelligent, well thought out and argued last word, expressed in restrained language. This may simply say virtually all there is to say on the subject, or may be an unanswerable conclusion (often based on professional knowledge or personal experience). It may relate to the topic or some other point raised during the thread, or may be a call to order. Whatever it is, it will not lose force or validity to any degree with time, and will stand as a dignified ending both for its author and the topic.
Please bear all this in mind.
typo – author
I used this tactic about 5 months earlier arguing with a drunk friend at work.
He nearly caused an accident that could have injured me, then reached for headphones that I was wearing.
I told him to chill out, then he got all defensive and wanted to fight me.
He called me all kinds of names and I responded with “Well, What do you want me to do now? Should I be effected by your words?”
This got him angry,
then I simply stated that I was just trying to work, and you nearly injured me.
Then he called me some more names, and I remained calm. Then I told him that I could call him 10 names that could get him angrier but that I wouldn’t. Then he got even angrier because I refused to call him a name.
Then he called me another name while he walked away, because he realized that I wasn’t going to fight him.
Number 1 and 2 aere the most important. It’s funny because I have allways used these rules but usely lose lol.
Precision-you didn`t hurt my feelings it`s that iv`e been accused of a few of those alphabets you listed.I said it with tongue in cheek. OK Anon you got me perplexed. (What dirty dogs do to palings) Whats that mean ? I love Churchill`s quotes.I think the funniest one was when some lady told him if they were married she would poison his food and he replied if she was his wife he would take the poison on his own.Im sure I didn`t quote him correctly (redneck translation) but you know what I mean.
bigski,
I wondered what a paling might mean outside the UK, if anything; and so whether that quote would make sense. Presumably the meaning of paling is the problem (as in, I say pavement, you say sidewalk, etc.)?
A pale is a pointed length of wood to be used for fencing or as a stake. Palings are the same joined together to form a fence.
I guess the rest of the joke should *comes naturally* now!
It was Nancy Astor: “Winston, if I were your wife I would put poinson in your coffee.”
“Nancy, if I were your hsuband I would drink it.”
LV has done Churchill quotes, but I’d happily see more (hopefully some I don’t know).
Anon: Was it Churchill who said, and again I believe to Mrs. Astor, “Madam, you are ugly!”
She replied, “You, sir, are drunk!”
“Yes. But in the morning I shall be sober.”
Anon-OK now I get it.Churchill was a very quick wit and clever also.I wish someone would make a list of more of his quotes.Thanks for the info.Also I think congress made him a U.S citizen.
segue,
It was actually an ENORMOUS Labour (socialist) North of England MP called Bessie Braddock (wonderful name!), and was the other way around.
Bessie, during a political meeting, “Winston, you’re drunk!”
Winston, “You are correct, Bessie. I am indeed drunk. But in the morning I shall be sober. You, however, will still be ugly!”
bigski,
Churchill’s mother was a U.S. citizen, as a result of which someone once got a rare winner over him, calling him a mongrel!
I’ll look into whether there are enough of his best quotes left over from the first LV dip.
I love these witty put downs and aphorisms. I’ll consider doing one by musical composers and conductors. There are some classical (pun intended) beauts.