How to become a master in the art of arguing: tips from Arthur Schopenhauer

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

Arguing is a skill that can and should be learned. One of the most curious works on persuasion development was written by Arthur Schopenhauer. In it, he cites many cunning tricks, the correct use of which greatly increases the chances of winning an argument.

Arthur Schopenhauer was one of the wittiest people of his time. He penned not only works on academic philosophy, but also hundreds of life aphorisms. According to contemporaries, in conversations he shone with inimitable resourcefulness. Schopenhauer loved to start controversies and always came out victorious.

The essence of the dispute

Although Schopenhauer mainly wrote about fundamental philosophical problems, he was also occupied with everyday questions of a practical nature. Thus, in his work "Eristics, or The Art of Winning Arguments" he carefully examines the process of the dispute and gives many cunning tricks, the correct use of which greatly increases the chances of winning.

But what is meant by a dispute and victory in it? Schopenhauer immediately separates the field of research aimed at obtaining objective knowledge from the field of ordinary verbal debate. The victory in the argument does not mean the victory of the truth. In an argument, you can defend a completely wrong point of view, but if your arguments sound convincing, you can easily win.

Any dispute boils down to refuting the opponent's thesis. There are two ways to destroy the thesis: to point out its inconsistency with the real state of affairs or other statements of the opponent.

Tricks to help you win an argument

1. Include the opponent's statements in a broader context that contradicts the statement

A: "Donald Trump's victory will do us a lot of good."

B: “No, because Trump is a successful politician. But everyone knows that only deceitful scoundrels achieve success in politics. What benefit can you expect from such a person?"

Opponent B expanded the term “president” to include the term “politician”, in which he included the sign of dishonesty.

2. Use the same word with different meanings

A: "I will not work because work makes me unhappy."

B: “A man must earn good money and be successful. You are a man, so go to the office."

Opponent B endowed the concept of "man" with the meaning he needed and applied it to this case. He changed the word "man" for social expectations of a man.

3. Use relative judgments as absolute

A: “I don't like uneducated people. I like rock musicians."

B: "But many uneducated people compose good rock music."

Opponent B tried to use a particular feature as an absolute one. The answer to him should be: “I do not like uneducated people, because there is nothing to talk about with them. And I love rock musicians on the basis of my love for this musical genre. There is no contradiction here."

4. Ask as many questions as possible to your opponent to confuse him

And if you defend your point of view, argue your position as quickly as possible.

The enemy will concentrate on your speech, so he will not have time to evaluate the correctness of logical conclusions.

5. Try to annoy your opponent

Being angry, he will not be able to reason correctly.

6. Mask the real purpose of your questions

In a dispute, we often want to hear something specific from an opponent, a word, so that we can then use it in constructing conclusions that are beneficial to us. For example:

A: "So you claim that man descended from a monkey, right?" In this case, we want to hear "yes" in order to remind the enemy later that he recently insisted on his faith in God.

B: "No, I say otherwise."The enemy saw through you and answered "no" so as not to fall into the trap.

It would be correct to disguise your true purpose:

A: "That is, you are claiming that man did not descend from a monkey, right?"

B: “Are you listening to me? I just assert that he descended from her. The enemy got caught, pecking at a dummy question. You got the right yes.

A: “But an hour ago you said that you are a Christian, that is, you believe that God created man. You contradict yourself."

7. Don't let your adversary draw general conclusions from your chain of false reasoning

You have to do it yourself. In this case, the enemy noticed your trick:

A: "A person has a brain, right?"

B: "Right."

A: "The ram has a brain, right?"

B: "Right."

A: "Therefore, man is a ram, right?"

B: "False."

It was necessary to finish correctly like this:

A: “Therefore, using the logical law of the excluded third, man is a ram. And if you argue with logic, you thereby only confirm my conclusion."

B: "But this is not true …"

Let the opponent begin to prove that you were wrong. You won points in the eyes of others, and also worsened the emotional state of your opponent.

8. Use synonyms with emotional connotations that create a sense of the truth of your position

For example, if you criticize the church, talk about the priests, not the clergy. If you speak out against the actions of any nation, do not forget to use the word "quilted jackets".

9. Give your opponent the only possible choice

For example, you need to prove that absolutely all children should study mathematics.

A: "Which state is stronger and more promising: in which there are more educated or uneducated people?"

B: "Educated".

A: "Can you call an educated person who does not know mathematics, or not?"

B: "No."

We gave the opponent the illusion of choice twice. He is forced to agree with you for fear of answering stupidly and wallowing in paradoxes.

10. If your opponent is bashful, deduce anything from his words

The main thing is to do it with confidence.

For example, we defend the position of the divine creation of the world and man.

A: "Numerous scientific studies have proven that the theory of evolution is correct."

B: “Which once again confirms the omnipotence of God! After all, he could not create the world in such a way that science in it could not prove something! Imagine that you are God. Are you going to slip people instead of science with a fake that can do nothing? You only confirm my position, my friend! And don't try to argue!"

11. Find fault with all statements of the interlocutor, looking for contradictions

For example, he lives in Moscow, but is trying to prove that Moscow is a bad city. It is worth asking him why he will not leave then. All these nagging weakens the harmony of the opponent's position.

12. If you feel that the enemy is winning, immediately leave the topic

Everyone is familiar with this trick. For example, we prove that the best model of democracy has been implemented in Russia. The rival puts pressure on us by the fact that half of the country's population does not go to elections and there are falsifications everywhere. In response, you can change the topic of conversation: “You'd better look at the United States. Or remember Ancient Greece …"

13. Make your opponent inflate your thesis and destroy it

A: "People should have a cup of coffee in the morning."

B: "So there is a benefit from coffee?"

A: "Yes."

B: "But numerous studies say coffee is bad for your health."

As a result, Opponent B disputes the "coffee is good for you" thesis rather than the original "coffee in the morning".

14. Anger your opponent

If an argument of yours makes your opponent angry, repeat it as often as possible.

15. Use humor

If the listeners' knowledge of the subject of the dispute is not great, it is possible to present the correct conclusion of the opponent in an absurd light with the help of jokes. For example:

A: Friends, Charles Darwin claims that man descended from ape. To be honest, looking at the shape of Charles' skull, the abundance of vegetation on his face and the wretchedness of the products of his thinking, it is difficult to deny him such ancestors. But we are people with you!"

16. Refer to famous people

Even if you prove that the Earth is the center of the world, your team has such great minds as Plato, Pythagoras, Confucius, King Solomon. Remind confidently that all of these people put the Earth in the center. Perhaps a thought will slip through your opponent's head: "Hmm, but there is something in this position."

The crowd respects the authorities.

17. In a difficult situation, admit your incompetence

For example: “What you say is beyond the reach of my weak mind. Maybe you are right, but I am a stupid man in the street and do not understand this, therefore I refuse to express any opinion. This trick works if you have more authority than your opponent.

18. Reduce the opponent's thesis to some position despised by all

You need to exclaim: "Dear, you are a racist!", "Yes, you draw conclusions like fortune-tellers and astrologers."

19. If the opponent is trying to translate the topic, in no case do not let him do it

When you find your opponent's weak point, keep hitting him.

20. Puzzle and confuse the enemy with a meaningless set of words and phrases

The main thing is to keep a serious expression on your face.

We have presented the most interesting tricks that Schopenhauer wrote about. You can find some more tips in his book. Their knowledge is useful not only for attacks, but also for self-defense, because many of the techniques are used by people intuitively.