How to argue on social media so as not to spoil your nerves and reputation

2024 Author: Malcolm Clapton | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 03:44

Fighting for an idea is best done in a polite and well-argued manner.

This article is part of the "" project. In it we talk about relationships with ourselves and others. If the topic is close to you, share your story or opinion in the comments. Will wait!

Any dispute can seriously fray your nerves. Even if it seems that a potential opponent is writing complete nonsense, and it is easy to get rid of him, he can easily think the same about you. Therefore, everything runs the risk of turning into a protracted and very unpleasant discussion.

Imagine the situation: you saw something blatant, got angry once, and then cooled down and live peacefully on. But if you get involved in an argument, there is a risk of boiling over after each answer and, as a result, spending much more effort, time and mental resources on a conversation, which, in general, means little.

Some 20 years ago, no one knew what a certain Oleg from Vyshny Volochyok thought, and no one would have thought of arguing with him. The Internet has brought us into contact with people we would never have met in real life. So why pay so much attention to other people's opinions?

Unfortunately, passing by is not always easy. For example, if you have not answered a person, but for the second day you have been continuing to discuss with him in your thoughts, it might be better to argue right away on the Internet - there is at least a real interlocutor. If the trick of ignoring the controversial issue has failed, it is worth taking note of a few simple rules.

Decide why argue

Social media discussion can have its advantages:

• It allows you to learn a lot of new things, albeit not in the most peaceful way. In the end, we don't have many exits to people with opposite positions. You can quietly read their forum or clash with them in an argument. The information received does not necessarily make you change your mind, although this is a normal outcome. You will also have the opportunity to understand the weaknesses in your argumentation and prepare for future discussions.
• Controversy can be good for your personal brand. If the question lies in your professional plane, participation in the discussion will allow you to show yourself as a specialist.
• It can be extremely difficult to convince an opponent in a dispute. But there are almost always doubters around who can read the conversation and lean towards your position.
• There are cannibalistic opinions to which it is impossible not to react. I would like to object to make it clear: not everyone shares it, it is not the norm.

Getting involved in a discussion, it would be nice to imagine exactly why this is needed. And adjust the strategy of the dispute depending on the goal, if there is one, of course.

Read everything the author wrote

And re-read it again. In the comments to almost any post discussed on social networks, you can find people who have no idea what it is about. They snatched two or three sentences out of the text, or even thought out for the author and now they argue with the arguments out of their heads.

It is not worth joining such commentators, and before arguing, it is always better to carefully study the entire test. Maybe the warlike fervor will do.

To be polite

Many people allow themselves more on the Internet than in person. But the worldwide demand for green communication has changed the balance. Now, in order to pass for one in the company of decent people, you have to “swear” politely even in the virtual space.

This means not only not calling your opponent and his mother names, but also paying attention to spelling with punctuation. Mistakes in “-that / -t” are not fatal, but they haven't helped anyone look smarter yet.

Clarify your opponent's expertise

If you don't, it can be awkward. For example, in 2019, after a fire in the Cathedral of Notre-Dame-de-Paris, everyone, young and old, began to criticize French firefighters and tell them what to do. Anna Barne wrote on Facebook post Anne Barne's post on Facebook about why the firefighters did everything right.

Naturally, “experts” immediately came to the commentary with a valuable opinion: “Do you know exactly the difference between an airplane and a helicopter?”, “I had no idea that the higher art school graduates fire specialists. Aunt, what are you talking about? True, unlike the sofa experts, Anna Barnet had already been working in Avialesokhrana for several years by that time, and before that she had been an art expert-expert in the Moscow Department of Culture.

In general, the commentators looked stupid, because they did not appreciate the author's level of expertise and did not realize that she definitely understood the issue better.

Assess your expertise

Let's say the depth of the opponent's expertise is not obvious. But nothing prevents you from being critical of your own: is it enough to speak out. It is not necessary to confirm knowledge with a diploma. Maybe you read a lot on the topic, saw inconsistencies in the reasoning or some other controversial points. But it is often not worth sharing your own opinion to the right and to the left just like that. We often overestimate its importance.

Argue with an opinion, not a person

Deliberate discussion is not easy. Calling the author stupid or wishing his family to experience all the bad things for themselves is easier than looking for arguments. Nevertheless, it is worth getting personal with caution, even if the person is very angry. And his relatives are not at all to blame for anything, maybe they also endure him with their last bit of strength.

Of course, there are positions that instantly turn a person into a cannibal. If he first translates the grandmothers across the road, and then writes that it would be cool to exterminate all the people with tattoos, the latter still outweighs. On the one hand, social networks seem to be not a party meeting to expose him. On the other hand, it is not clear how to seriously discuss a position if there are questions to the person as a whole.

However, many opinions and misconceptions do not make someone bad. So it is not necessary to try to smash him to smithereens just because he thinks differently.

Take a break before posting

Even very seasoned people in heated discussions will not hurt to take it as a rule: write a comment, take a break, send a comment. So it will be possible and thought to be formulated as clearly as possible, and to delete everything that is written under the influence of emotions.

Make good arguments

To be convincing, you can turn to authorities. There are studies, statistics, expert comments and much more. They look more powerful than unfounded statements.

For example, an opponent declares that he does not need reinforced nets on the windows and his cat will not suffer, because he opens the windows only in the ventilation mode. And you once to him - the material of the Lifehacker, in which the veterinarian tells about the dangers of the ventilation regime for pets.

Of course, the statements themselves may be true. But why don't we all follow the example of doctors who advocate evidence-based medicine? They are already experts, but they still additionally support their opinion with links to research.

Pay less attention to personal experience

When we face something personally, it seems like a good way to illustrate in an argument. But personal experience can hardly be called a convincing argument. For example, a person writes: “What kind of poverty are you talking about? I live in Kurgan and receive 500 thousand a month. Although even the official statistics hints to us: everything is not so rosy.

It is even worse to take the position “I didn’t see it, so it’s not there”. With a high degree of probability, few people have seen a bush dog, but it is. But many have seen Darth Vader a hundred times on TV, although he is not. In other words, it is permissible to rely on personal experience in the discussion, but it is unlikely to elevate it to the absolute.

Try to hear the interlocutor

The problem with any dispute is that people get into it to talk. But sometimes it's worth listening to. Some things can seriously shake our world. They make us feel bad because they show us that we didn’t behave very well or did something wrong before. It is unpleasant. The first impulse is to declare everyone a fool and forget.

But if you start to listen and think about something, then soon you can easily come to revolutionary discoveries that will make us better.

Remember viewers

A public debate is always a showcase. But it is worth looking at the discussion from the outside: what impression will you make if you join it, will you be able to persuade observers to your point of view with your statements.

Discussions are important, they can indeed slowly but surely change the world, attracting new supporters of a particular idea. You can imagine yourself as an ambassador of your position and defend it with dignity.

Leave in time

Sometimes the discussion lasts so long that it becomes no longer interesting to anyone, and each participant just wants to leave the last word for himself. But we're not in fifth grade. If you use well-thought-out arguments in which your opponent won't be able to find real, not fictional, holes, you can leave the conversation at any time.

If the opponent considers it a loss and a drain, well, apparently, he still remained in the fifth grade. And the other participants in the discussion are better off looking for an adult occupation.