The rhetorical art of persuasion is a subtle and very useful set of skills to master. Whether you like to debate for fun or if you are constantly involved in complicated discussions despite yourself, these guidelines will help you negotiate and convince your opponent that reason is on your side.
Steps
Method 1 of 4: Part 1: Choose Your Topic
Step 1. Gather the reasons why a particular statement may or may not be true
Regarding any specific topic, whether it was you who chose it, that has been assigned to you, or that you simply feel compelled to discuss, for no particular reason, generate as many statements as you can, both for and against. Sooner or later you will have a complicated and fairly detailed discussion on a topic. To be ready, you need to have a clear idea about it.
- For example, let's say you are discussing the general issue of gun control with someone. The main point of the discussion will be whether you are "against" or "for" a gun control policy, but in reality the question is much more complicated than that. Before deciding which side you are on, start asking yourself more in-depth questions to narrow down the matter so that you are forced to define the terms.
- What is meant by "gun control"? What is the purpose of the argument, legally and geographically? What does it mean to be "in favor"? What would it mean to be "against"? Why could anyone be in favor? Why could anyone be against?
Step 2. Start corroborating the different positions with evidence
But wait - you may be wondering: Why look for evidence for a position you may never endorse? Seeking evidence to support both positions is integral to understanding, constructing and possibly explaining the argument, regardless of which "side" you intend to support. At this point, consider it more of a research topic rather than a way to create a discussion.
- Let's say you're having an argument with your parents about your curfew and one of the reasons you've found in favor of an early curfew involves getting enough rest. Your parents believe you need enough rest each night to ensure good physical health, and getting home early allows you to get enough rest. In this case, it might be a good idea to look up statistics on how many hours of sleep a person your age actually needs to sleep and other data on the social and psychological effects of having to go home too early.
- It may be helpful to make notes on cards for this process if you are having a formal discussion. On the front, write any supporting reasoning: "An early curfew ensures a good night's sleep." On the back of the card, write references to the evidence you collected.
Step 3. Learn to ask yourself "Why" and "How?
. For each statement you generate in support or against a particular thesis, qualify it by asking yourself why and how that statement works. Why does the Second Amendment to the US Constitution guarantee the right to own a weapon? How does it operate today? Why is it an important consideration? ?
The answers to these questions should be used to add complexity to your topic: "While an early curfew ensures a healthy amount of rest, the negative impact on the child's social development outweighs the physical impact of sleep."
Step 4. Evaluate the reasons
Some reasons are "better" than others. "Gun control goes against the US Second Amendment guaranteeing the right to own weapons" is a better example of "gun control prevents me from having fun with my AK-47", because the former refers to articulated universal rights in legal documents while the latter is impossible to quantify or evaluate objectively. Ask the "Why?" of the second affirmation leads nowhere and the argument put forward in this way will fall quickly.
Order tickets in order of quality of reasoning. Put the best arguments on the front row and the worst ones on the bottom. How many of these would you call "good" reasons? How many seem to have water?
Method 2 of 4: Part 2: Structuring Your Argument
Step 1. Develop your reasons into an argument
When you have a good list of reasoning and evidence, and you've used that evidence to qualify your claims, narrowing them down to just one topic, you can start selecting the strongest reasons and organizing them into an argument.
A good rule of thumb is to stop at three main points, but there is no sacred law that prevents you from having more. Choose the strongest pieces of reasoning you have. If you have five, let it be five. Your argument will be stronger
Step 2. Qualify each claim with data, guarantees, and supports
British philosopher Stephen Toulmin argued that all good arguments are made by offering data, which is the actual evidence that supports the claim being made ("Boys between 16 and 18 need only 6 hours of sleep to maintain healthy functioning of the body ").
- What he calls a "guarantee" is the logical connection between the data and the claim being made ("So, as you can see, an early curfew unnecessarily prevents social development"); guarantees should be clearly stated for each statement.
- "Support" instead refers to the assumption made by the guarantee ("A late curfew ensures social development").
Step 3. Discuss counter-arguments and disputes
Now is your chance to present all the research you have done previously, familiarizing yourself with the arguments of both sides. If you have done the research from the perspective of the person you are talking to, you will be able to introduce their argument before they do and this will reinforce yours, preventing the other party from scoring any points.
Now, we could say that social interactions don't matter as much as getting enough sleep. That I can socialize as much as I want in school. But, as you can see, the facts just don't match…
Step 4. Conclude your argument by setting out the implications of your reasoning in an action
As you ask yourself more and more questions about your reasons, you will come closer and closer to a winning argument that you can summarize after presenting all your good reasoning and evidence: "It is true that I need to sleep. But the unfair restrictions and social strangulation that results from too early a curfew are disproportionate to the amount of sleep I need."
Method 3 of 4: Part 3: Attacking their Argument
Step 1. Identify logical errors in your rivals' argument
A logical mistake is a flaw in reasoning that is commonly used to make weak arguments appear stronger. Study them and learn to recognize them quickly, and you will be able to dismantle weak arguments more easily. Learn to avoid them yourself, because they can weaken your argument. Here are some examples of common mistakes:
- The "diversion" falsity implies the misrepresentation of someone else's argument to undermine it: "If you are in favor of too early curfews, I imagine you are also in favor of taking away all video games and sending me to a fascist re-education camp".
- The "ad hominem" attack involves assaulting your rivals personally to undermine their argument: "Dad has no friends. Why do we have to listen to what he thinks about going out with friends?".
- The "slippery slope" is related to basing your argument on a false cause and effect relationship: "I must be home by 9 today, next time I won't even be able to eat chips at the bar."
- The empirical error uses a single anecdote as proof of a universal policy: "Stephen can stay out until midnight".
Step 2. Attack their reasoning
Now that you have planned and presented your case, you can do a lot to create flaws in the opposition's arguments. Remember when you were trying to develop your argument, asking yourself "How?" and why?" to identify the weaknesses of a particular statement. Do the same with your rivals. If they haven't thought about these things before, as you did, you will find yourself at an advantage.
Step 3. Play the part of Socrates
Socrates was an expert in conducting a conversation, from simple altercations to disserting on complicated gray areas, asking inquisitive questions. Asking questions you already know the answer to is a good way to score points: "So do you think by forcing me to go home early I'll go to sleep earlier? Why? If I'm home, does that mean I'm asleep?".
Step 4. Identify their weaknesses and pretend not to know by asking for clarification
If they don't appear to have prepared statistics to support a particular issue, ask if they have any evidence to support a particular claim.
Method 4 of 4: Part 4: Modeling Your Argument
Step 1. Choose a presentation style based on your argument and your audience
In the ancient text on Rhetoric, Aristotle describes the three components of reasoning: Pathos, Ethos and Logos.
- Pathos-based persuasion aims at emotions. If you can get your opponent to identify with your argument, he will break his confidence in his argument and start sympathizing with yours.
- Logos-based persuasion aims at logic and facts. If you are arguing about something you can quantify in numbers, such as the "best" goalscorer of all time, the use of statistics is an important part of your argument. An emotional appeal in favor of a player on the basis that he was the best or most charitable father will not bring much water to your mill.
- Persuasion based on ethos exploits a position of experience or simple credibility. The word literally means "character". Someone with a tattoo may not necessarily be a tattoo expert, but is objectively more "qualified" than others to give you advice on it. You can use this to your advantage by linking to the topic at hand: "As a former military man and weapons expert, I can tell you that gun safety is a quality that everyone can learn."
Step 2. Stay calm
When arguing, keep calm and present your argument in an organized way. When the opposite side raises a point, always respond with something relevant to support your point.
Step 3. Avoid complacency
Allow the opposite party to finish speaking and let them know that you are listening to what they are saying. When you speak and your opponent tries to interfere, finish your point without raising your voice or speaking faster, but making it decisive.
If the other party does not stop talking and tries to assert their point of view without giving you space, calmly point out that you have had the courtesy to let them finish their sentences and that you would like to be treated the same way. This way you will appear as the most polite and mature party and this often helps win an argument
Step 4. Lose gracefully
Recognize errors in your reasoning or weaknesses in your argument right away and move on to other things. Learn to quickly identify lost ground and move to stronger spots. Stay focused on the image as a whole and don't get drawn into small skirmishes.
Advice
- Using 'childish' tactics, such as yelling "Shut up", will only lower the credibility of your argument. It will certainly be to the detriment of your cause.
- Sometimes it is better to partially agree with your opponent. Find a point where you both feel the same way. For example, "I agree with what you think about X, however, I think you don't understand Y". This way your opponent will be more willing to be convinced. But don't make the mistake of sharing too much with him.
- If you find yourself in a stalemate, close the conversation with meaningful questions before you leave, leave the opponent to think and convince himself that he is wrong, and postpone the conclusions until later, leaving the door open to victory.
- Try not to use "evasive words", like: could, maybe, should, maybe. These words leave a large hole in your argument. Other examples include phrases such as "A growing body of evidence proves that …" (This proves nothing), "According to the critics …" (What critics, what are their credentials?), "I heard that …" (Who you l 'he said, where is the source?). Sometimes the use of these expressions is unavoidable, but try to be as specific as you can.
