How To Win Every Argument Book Pdf? Best 51 Answer

Heated arguments can produce words you will regret, so stop this cruelty in its tracks.

It’s a familiar scene: an argument with your partner is heating up, and old grudges are creeping into the conversation. Your partner lashes out and brings up the one thing that really pisses you off. Now you’ve gone from angry to deeply offended. However, before you hit back with your own scathing comment, respond with one simple word.

As opposed to using phrases that exacerbate arguments, saying “ouch” could put a heated argument on hold, says marriage and family therapist Hal Runkel.

Tatiana Ayazo/Rd.com

Your significant other probably knows you better than anyone, including identifying the keywords that cut deep. No doubt your partner still loves you, but the heat of the moment brings forth words you’ll both regret later. That’s why you need to signal your partner that the conversation is getting nasty. Say, “Ouch. That hurt. I don’t know if you meant to hurt me; I don’t know if that’s what you aimed for; but that’s exactly what you did,” Runkel told Business Insider Australia.

That simple word will make your partner – and you – pause before dishing out meaner words. With a wake-up call that the argument could cause lasting damage, you can refresh yourself back to the core issue.

“That conversation — which was a very familiar path, this fight — is a completely different path now because one of you made a choice to actually become vulnerable,” Runkel says. “I’m open enough with you that you can actually hurt me. Now how about we talk like we really love each other?”

Now that you remember how much words hurt and how much the relationship means to you, you can both move on.

In a particularly fiery fight, there’s a good chance your partner can also come up with plenty of examples of harsh things you said. Denying it or glossing over it won’t solve anything, so admit that you hurt your partner and feel free to apologize, Runkel says.

If it doesn’t work and your partner continues to be cruel, this dialogue could say a lot about the relationship. But you won’t know until you try to make the change yourself.

Arguing is never fun, but dealing with a stubborn person can be even more frustrating.

It can feel like you’re talking to a wall when trying to explain your position to a stubborn person. They just don’t seem to be listening.

For stressed-out emotional eaters, binge-eaters, and people trying to lose weight, interacting with stubborn people can cause cravings and binge eating. This week’s newsletter has six tips to help you get through an argument with a stubborn person. You can finally get your point across and resolve the conflict by following these simple rules.

1. Don’t be confrontational from the start

If you come out with a bang, the other person will build up their defense and it will be even harder to get them to see your point. Instead, try to start the conversation in a friendly way. Make small talk before getting into the meat of the argument.

2. Agree with them on some points to gain their trust

When you find common ground, it’s easier to get them to see your page. Once they realize that you’re not just trying to disagree with them, they may be more open to hearing what you have to say.

3. Use logic and reason to make your arguments

A piece of advice here on using logic. Use logic based on how they reason. As? Listen to the stubborn person speaking. If the stubborn person mentions how much they “feel” about something, present your case from that perspective.

For example, you could say, “You said you would definitely take this approach. I think we should take a different approach for the following reasons…”

4. Appeal to her emotions sparingly

In some cases, you may need to appeal to the other person’s emotions to get them to see your point. However, be careful with this approach. If you use it too much, you will be hidden and you will lose all credibility.

If you can find a way to relate your argument to something the other person cares about, you’ll be more likely to get them to see things your way. Use specific examples to get your point across and help the other person understand why you’re right.

5. Don’t get emotional yourself

If you find yourself getting emotional during the argument, take a step back and try to calm down. Being angry or upset will only make the other person push harder. They will likely see you as irrational and unreasonable when you lose your cool, making them even more difficult to win over.

6. Be willing to compromise

In some cases, the best way to win an argument with a stubborn person is to be willing to accommodate them. If you find a solution that satisfies both of you, it’s worth considering. Remember, the goal is to resolve the conflict, not to prove you are right.

Wrap up

If you’ve ever argued with a stubborn person, you know it can be frustrating—especially when they’re right. But don’t give up! There are ways to reach them. Start by being non-confrontational from the start and agree with them on a few points. Then use logic and reason to make your point. Appeal to their emotions sparingly and don’t get emotional yourself. Be willing to compromise and you will eventually find a solution. Need help getting started? Arrange a free introductory meeting today! We would love to hear from you and increase your productivity!

How did you navigate stubborn people? Comment below!

With much love,

dr Kirsten Grant

I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but everyone’s been getting a little rowdy lately, whether it’s about world politics, your Twitter feed, or something meant as a quick drink after work.

There are few things more tiring than being confronted with someone who insists on discussing the relative merits of Jeremy Corbyn/Donald Trump after five craft ales, but when you’re faced with a combative situation, fine knowing how to take care of yourself.

Enter: psychology and the simple tricks that can help you walk away a winner.

Try the “Socratic method”.

A technique that sounds more intimidating than it actually is, the Socratic method involves questioning people to challenge differing viewpoints. Still sounds complicated? Suppose your partner is quite upset that you didn’t make it home for dinner and you crawl in drunk at 2am. Instead of engaging in a roaring match where you deny all allegations, instead ask questions like “How does that feel?”, “What would you rather be doing?”

This works on two levels. First, let your partner express what they’re feeling, which means releasing resentments instead of storing them up. Second, it shows that you’re listening and care about how someone else is feeling by making them feel considered. Give it a try, but don’t overdo it to avoid that 6-year-old-on-a-long-travel vibe.

Use positive words

During a tiff, the red fog often takes over and our speech becomes more emphatic. However, overly open and forceful arguments can weaken your position in the eyes of others instead of convincing them of your point of view.

Research by graduate students at Cornell University analyzed two years of posts on the ChangeMyView subReddit, a forum where people make arguments to change someone’s mind.

The results of the study concluded that “people who post calmer and more positive words like ‘help’ and ‘please’ are more malleable. This applies when they post more adjectives ‘, ‘none’ and ‘best’.”

It even went so far as to put people off by harsh-sounding words: “Using ‘calm’ language to say something is more effective than swearing or using aggressive language – sounds like ‘librarian’ and ‘boring’ than.” hard, ‘sharp’ words like ‘terrorism’ and ‘erection’.”

So no talk of erections, ok?

And remember, as Caitlin Moran wrote in an essay about winning online disputes, “If a conversation starts out angry, it will almost certainly continue angry and end up apoplectic.”

Exaggerate your opponent’s position

According to Arthur Schopenhauer, author of The Art of Being Right, one way to reduce the effectiveness of your partner’s arguments is to take their position beyond what they’re saying and expand on their position.

“The more general your opponent’s statement becomes,” he says, “the more objections you can find to it. The more limited and narrow your own claims remain, the easier it is to defend them.”

This means you can take your argument far beyond the intended point and then demonstrate how ridiculous and unreasonable the overblown position is. For example, if someone argues that eating meat is bad for the environment, you might point out that even things like flushing the toilet and using public transportation are bad for the environment.

Check your threatening body language

You might think that staring intensely at someone is one way to show someone you mean business, but a recent paper published by the University of British Columbia argues that eye contact increases resistance to persuasion. The study concluded that:

“Deliberately maintaining direct eye contact resulted in less persuasion than looking at the mouth. These results suggest that efforts to increase eye contact can be counterproductive in a variety of persuasion contexts.”

Body language expert Jennifer Rigdon has listed other gestures to avoid. “Sit or stand in a manner that is similar to the person you are speaking to, this will make you appear open and nonthreatening. But be careful not to hold anything in your hands. Holding a phone or even a pen could make you seem withdrawn.”

Use the anchor effect

According to attorney John Curtis, the anchoring effect means that “often in negotiations, the party that makes the first move – whether it’s a proposed solution or an offer – wins. That means the solution ends up being closer to its original position. Why? Because they anchored the conversation.”

Several studies have shown that initial offers have a greater impact on the outcome of negotiations than later counter-offers. So if you’re arguing about something you specifically want, say it first and jump deep into what you want, rather than slow down.

This content is created and maintained by a third party and imported to this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may find more information about this and similar content on piano.io

If you purchase an independently verified product or service through a link on our site, SPY.com may receive an affiliate commission.

* These seven books cover all kinds of relationship struggles

* Authors range from couples therapists to experienced mediators

* Improve your communication

Love can come in all forms, including fighting, screaming, and sometimes saying things you regret. To improve the health of your relationship, read these seven books by knowledgeable professionals written to give you perspective.

1. Fight less, love more

This book by Harvard-trained attorney and mediator Laurie Puhn will help you spot bad habits and conversational tactics, and better communicate with your partner so you’re the discussion, not the matchstick.

Image courtesy of Rodale Books

2. Talk to me like I’m someone you love

This interactive book by couples therapist Nancy Dreyfus was inspired by a particularly heated session between a man and a woman where, in the middle of a heated argument, she motioned for her husband to hold up a card that said, “Talk to me like I’m someone.” you love,” which immediately changed the dialogue. This book is full of pragmatic advice.

Image courtesy of Nancy Dreyfus

3. Communication Miracles for Couples: Simple and effective tools to create more love and less conflict

This book by psychotherapist Jonathan Robinson examines a key aspect of healthy relationships: communication. It outlines methods to avoid finger pointing and focus on understanding.

Image courtesy of Conari Press

4. Healing from Infidelity: The Divorce Guide to Rebuilding Your Marriage After an Affair

Many people see infidelity as the deal breaker for any relationship. Michele Weiner-Davis has written a straight forward book that tackles a common problem and is a must read for anyone dealing with this all too common problem.

Image courtesy of Michele Weiner-Davis Training Corp

5. Love & Respect: The love she desires most; The respect he badly needs

This book by Dr. Emmerson Eggerich will help you reboot as a couple and see each other in a whole new light.

Image courtesy of Thomas Nelson

6. His needs, her needs: building an affair-proof marriage

Your relationship problems may be more common than you think. This book identifies the 10 most common problems men and women face and offers proven solutions on how to fix them.

Image courtesy of Revell

7. The 5 Love Languages: The secret of love that lasts

This book, a New York Times bestseller now celebrating its 25th anniversary, examines the five different ways people express their feelings of love. Once established, identifying your love language can improve the health of your relationship.

Image courtesy of Northfield Publishing

10 must-reads from Oprah’s Book Club

Have you ever heard an argument or statement presented as fact that just didn’t ring true?

Perhaps the statement seemed to come to a wild conclusion, or the argument put forward was based on evidence that could not be easily validated or was taken out of context.

These kinds of statements are often referred to as logical fallacies. Essentially, an argument built on flawed reasoning that – if you apply logic – turns out to be wrong.

Logical fallacies can be persuasive and are often used in rhetoric to encourage people to think a certain way or to believe certain things. So we have to be careful and question the things we hear that don’t quite “ring true”.

In this article, we’ll learn about the different types of fallacies that can be used, what they are, and how to spot them.

Don’t be fooled by logical fallacies! View the transcript for this video here.

What are logical fallacies?

A logical fallacy is a statement that appears to be true until you apply the rules of logic. Then you realize that’s not the case. Logical fallacies can often be used to mislead people – to make them believe something they would not otherwise believe.

For example, consider the following statement:

“In a study designed by a famous scientist to test the effect of pleasant images on motivation, employees were shown images of baby animals and beautiful natural scenes for the first five minutes at work.

“Amazingly, the results showed a 10 percent jump in profits in the first quarter and record revenue for the year. So, showing people pleasant images is a great way to motivate them and increase productivity.”

What do you think of the argument you just read? do you believe the conclusion

You shouldn’t.

The argument contains a number of logical fallacies. But don’t worry if you believe the conclusion: the passage contains some very common (and effective) tactics for manipulating reason and logic.

The ability to distinguish a valid argument from a false one is an important skill. This is a key aspect of critical thinking and can help you avoid falling for fake news.

If you’ve fallen for a logical fallacy, wrong conclusions could lead you to make decisions you later regret. And using a logical fallacy in your own arguments can make you appear gullible or uninformed. Worse, it can make you appear dishonest.

Note: Logical fallacies are sometimes confused with cognitive biases, but they are not the same. A cognitive bias is a tendency to make decisions or act in illogical ways caused by our values, memory, socialization, and other personal characteristics.

Now let’s examine some of the most common logical fallacies people use so you can spot them and understand how to challenge them when you encounter them.

Examples of logical fallacies

Do you remember the example above? It relied on two of the most common fallacies in logic: appeals to authority and false inductions. Let’s take a closer look at both.

appeals to authority

Here you are relying on an “expert” source to form the basis of your argument. In the example above, the source that appears to be knowledgeable is “a famous academic”. Mention of an academic usually implies authority and expertise, and that your argument is supported by rigorous research. The effect is even stronger if you use a real name.

But attribution alone is not enough to “prove” your case. Even if the academic is genuine and their research is genuine, it may not necessarily support your argument — it may be misquoted, misunderstood, taken out of context, or contain important caveats that undermine the point you are trying to make.

Try not to rely too heavily on the authority of a single expert or on a single source of data.

Wrong inductions

False induction is often referred to as “non sequitur”, which translates from Latin as “it does not follow”. This fallacy leads you to infer a causal relationship where none is obvious. Just because something happened before something else doesn’t mean there’s a logical, causal connection between the two.

In our example, showing employees pleasant images may or may not be associated with improved company performance. Many other factors could have played a role.

It also concludes that improved productivity is the result of increased motivation. This is another wrong induction. The example does not show at all whether the pleasant images had a direct effect on motivation and thus productivity.

Other common logical fallacies

The example above uses two types of fallacies, but there are many other logical fallacies that you may have encountered in your workplace or more generally. Here are six other common logical fallacies.

The slippery slope

The inclined plane argument rests on your thinking that the worst that can happen will actually happen if you choose a certain course of action. Of course, this is not necessarily the case.

Example “If we allow Susan to leave earlier, we will soon be freeing up all Friday afternoons.”

Such arguments come up often. But if you examine the example more closely, you can see that it’s illogical to conclude that you really have to give everyone an afternoon off each week just by allowing one employee to leave early one time.

The bandwagon fallacy

This is where you are tricked into believing in an idea or suggestion simply because it is popular or has a lot of support. But the fact that many people agree with something doesn’t make it true or right.

Example “We surveyed all the customers in the store and everyone agreed that it would be a good idea to be open 24 hours a day. We need to create a 24-hour schedule as soon as possible.”

In fact, you need to ask a few more questions before you can draw any conclusion from an informal survey like this one.

For example: Who were these people? Would you actually buy something in the store at 2 a.m.? If yes, how often? What are the costs compared to the benefits of such a plan?

At the same time, remember that just because many people believe something doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Always try to think critically and don’t be guided by forceful arguments.

Note: The “Appeal to Tradition” fallacy is similar to the train wagon fallacy. Here the argument focuses on something that has “always” been done or is a widely accepted practice. For example: “We’ve always hired the CEO from among the ranks. When we look outward, there’s too much disagreement and discord.”

The Fallacy of the False Dichotomy

The fallacy of the false dichotomy relies on an “either/or” argument: you only offer two options and force people to choose between them. In fact, neither option can be the best, and many other options may be available. But the argument makes it seem like the proposed option is the only viable one.

Example “We as a board can either choose to approve this IPO or we can be slowly annihilated by our competitors.”

In this example, there are almost certainly other options that the Board might consider. And is raising capital even the answer to improving or maintaining the company’s competitive position?

The strawman fallacy

The strawman fallacy is about making up a false argument and then refuting it. The counter-argument is then taken to be true. By misrepresenting an opponent’s position (and then knocking it down), your own preferred position appears stronger.

Example A local politician plans to expand the community’s cycling network and add several new speed cameras in densely populated areas. Her opponent says: “They want us all to give up driving forever. They are punishing the honest car owners and commuters who help pay these politicians’ salaries.”

By arguing that the proposed changes were an attack on motorists, opponents slammed the position much more easily than if they had tried to address the real concerns the proposal addresses – in this case, an increase in deaths from traffic accidents and degree of pollution.

Note: Do not confuse a strawman argument with a strawman proposal. A strawman suggestion is a popular problem-solving concept where you start with a half-finished idea and intentionally poke “holes” in it to arrive at a better end product. Unlike a strawman argument, a strawman suggestion is an effective process when used with clear and honest intentions.

The No True Scotsman fallacy

Sometimes referred to as an “appeal to purity,” this is a way of dismissing flaws in or criticism of an argument.

No matter how persuasive the counterargument may be, the person making the fallacy “moves the goalposts” and shifts the terms of the argument so that the contradictory evidence does not hold.

Example Andy says a Scot would never put sugar on his porridge. Dougal replies that he’s Scottish and puts sugar on his porridge. Andy replies that no true Scotsman puts sugar on their porridge. Andy therefore changes the terms of the argument, implying that Dougal is not a “true” Scotsman, to support his own position.

observation selection

That means emphasizing the positive aspects of an idea and ignoring the negative ones. You try to make your argument more convincing by only telling half the truth.

Example “I know that our TV advertising is more effective than radio. The numbers show that we reach twice as many viewers with TV, and our focus groups remember the TV commercial 38 percent better than the radio show.”

What this argument doesn’t address is the cost and return on investment of television advertising compared to radio. Does the 38% increase in customer retention translate to sales conversions? What percentage of radio listeners versus TV viewers actually buy the product?

It’s easy to fall into observational selection when you’re attached to an idea, especially if you helped generate it.

The fallacy of “statistics of small numbers” is a similar concept. This is where you take an observation and draw a general conclusion from it.

For example: “I would never use Gaudi Brothers to supply our paper products.

This opinion is based on a bad experience and does not necessarily mean that the company is always unreliable. Perhaps the purchasing company was late in placing orders or late in paying its bills.

Do you find this article useful? You can learn another 44 problem-solving skills by joining the Mind Tools Club. Join the Mind Tools Club today!

Subscribe to our newsletter Receive new career skills every week, also receive our latest offers and a free downloadable Personal Development Plan workbook. Read our privacy policy

How to avoid logical fallacies

To spot logical fallacies, you need a basic understanding of how an argument works. In logic, an argument is a set of propositions where one proposition is derived from the other (or others). There are two types of statements:

Premises are statements offered to provide evidence for the conclusion of an argument.

are statements offered to provide evidence for the conclusion of an argument. Conclusions are statements derived from the evidence presented.

For an argument to be valid or logical, the premises must fully support the conclusion. You do this in one of two ways:

1. With deductive reasoning

Here you start from general premises and come to a concrete, safe conclusion.

Example Premise 1: Trucan Supply decided it would limit its layoffs to just the New York facility to minimize redundancy costs. Premise 2: Trucan employee Tom received a notice of termination. Conclusion: Tom works at the facility in New York.

2. Use of inductive reasoning

Here one starts from concrete premises and comes to a generalized conclusion. This “bottom-up” logic uses premises to arrive at a conclusion that is probable but not certain. (Read our article on inductive reasoning to learn more about it.)

Example premise 1: April promotions in the last five years have increased sales by an average of 15 percent. Premise 2: Summer campaigns did not lead to any measurable increase in sales during this period. Conclusion: In order to increase sales, this year’s campaign should better take place in April instead of in the summer.

To check that an argument presented to you has solid logical basis, apply these two tests. If it does, you can rest assured that the argument has merit. If not, request more information and supporting evidence.

infographic

You can see our fallacies infographic here:

Arguing on any level is often seen as something negative – especially in a relationship. But the reality is that a fight with your partner is all but inevitable. Right now, when most of us are either locked in with a partner or feeling the strain of being separated from a partner, our relationships have never been so strained. And it’s more important than ever to learn to argue properly.

Rather than avoiding something, arguing can be a really healthy way to communicate how you’re feeling. But it’s important to make sure you’re arguing effectively. So the next time one of you accidentally leaves the dirty dishes on the side, have this list ready.

How can fighting be good?

Fighting can be a positive part of a relationship, and having fights doesn’t necessarily mean your relationship is bad. “We can’t expect couples to be perfectly matched and aligned on every single level because we’re all individuals, so naturally there will be instances where we disagree and disagree,” explains the sex and relationship psychotherapist , Kate Moyle.

Arguments, while natural, can also be very productive. “Arguments help us communicate what’s important to us, see each other’s perspectives, and understand each other differently,” Kate adds. So when you fight, see it as an opportunity to improve your relationship.

However, if you feel that your relationship is toxic, unhealthy, or abusive, then you should seek help. You can call the National Domestic Abuse Helpline on 0800 2000 247 at a safe time.

Is never arguing unhealthy?

Savana Ogburn / Refinery29 for Getty Images Getty Images

Suppressing feelings is never good in any situation, and staying still can actually make things worse. As Kate explains, “If we never fully express ourselves to our partners, we can hold onto feelings of resentment or irritation, and that can be more damaging to a relationship.”

Holding back on being honest with your partner also means you miss out on being vulnerable, which is important to strengthening your bond as a couple. Plus, your problems are likely to pile up and culminate in an even bigger fight, says Kate.

How do you argue better?

1. Stay logical

Try not to let your emotions take over the logic of the situation. “When we argue, the area of ​​the brain known as the amygdala is activated, leading to a surge in stress hormones and making our responses more emotional than logical – and this can affect our ability to communicate clearly,” explains Kate.

So, if possible, try to focus on what happened so that anger or excitement doesn’t drown out your communication.

Rochelle Brock/Refinery29 for Getty Images Getty Images

2. Use “I” statements

Avoid blaming the other person as this tends to upset them rather than create a situation where you work together to solve a problem. “Starting statements with ‘you’ directly blames your partner’s behavior, while ‘I’ takes that away and puts the emphasis on how it makes you feel,” says Kate.

3. Don’t bring up the past

Limit the reasoning to a current issue rather than drawing on past events. “Bringing on the past can get you stuck in a tennis match of ‘You did this, I did that,'” explains Kate, “but doing that keeps you from getting anywhere.”

4. Listen and explain what you don’t understand

“One of the biggest problems with conflict is misunderstanding,” says Kate, so make sure you know 100% what your partner means. You can do this by asking questions like, “Can I verify that’s what you meant?” or “I understood that from it.” Making assumptions will only make an argument worse, so clarify and double-check things you’re not sure about.

5. Make inquiries instead of complaints

Try not to address problems without actually offering a solution. “Demand that your partner try to do things differently in the future instead of focusing on what happened in the past,” Kate suggests. “It gives you both the power to change what happens next.”

Tommy Starck / EyeEm Getty Images

6. Take a break

It can be helpful to withdraw from an argument, calm down, and come back to it. Kate recommends setting a 20-minute timer, as this will keep the argument from dragging on.

7. Decide what an argument is worth

While arguing can be productive, you need to identify which things to let slide. “In relationships, we’re always going to do things that annoy each other,” explains Kate, “so don’t do the little things like never putting socks in the hamper or not clearing out coffee cups.”

Instead, Kate suggests giving each other “no-go areas” — little things you discourage the other person from doing.

How to make up after a quarrel

Listen to your partner’s side and empathize with them. Rephrase this by saying, “I can see how you must have felt” or “I can see how it must have been on your part,” Kate suggests. If there’s something you know will spark a fight, such as B. If you feel criticized, tell your partner so you can avoid it in the future. However, some things you may have to agree to disagree with.

Do you like this article? Sign up for our newsletter to get more articles like this delivered straight to your inbox.

SIGN IN

Emily Gulla Emily Gulla is Editorial Assistant/Junior Entertainment and Lifestyle Writer for Cosmopolitan UK, covering celebrity, TV and film for the website, magazine and video.

This content is created and maintained by a third party and imported to this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may find more information about this and similar content on piano.io

question

How can you know what someone else is thinking?

Community Response

Really you can’t. Half the time you can’t be sure of the totality of your own thoughts. You can just guess what the person is thinking in that moment based on the context, their actions, and the things that are happening to them. Balance that with the likelihood of you being right, how well you know the person. Sometimes telling a person you know what they’re thinking is about convincing them that your guess about their thoughts is actually their biggest concern!

5 ways to end an argument in less than a minute

Pat LaDouceur, PhD, helps people struggling with anxiety, panic, and relationship stress who want to feel more focused and confident. She has a private practice…Read more

The problem with arguments is that they don’t work.

I’m not talking about a good debate where you have some great ideas and they collide and you start a healthy back and forth that feels funny. I mean arguments – where the tension starts to build, the answers get personal, and you go in circles without getting anywhere.

Often this type of conflict takes on a life of its own, where you end up arguing about who does most of the chores or what time you got home last night, while larger issues like caring, teamwork, and appreciation lie beneath the surface.

This is what many of the couples I work with mean when they say, “We can’t communicate.” They start what seems like a simple conversation that escalates within minutes to criticism, blame, hostility, or blockages.

It’s not just couples either – unwanted fights happen in families, between friends and at work. However, with some skill, you can learn to stop them so you can move on to solving the real problems.

What is not working

Have you ever felt like you’re right but the other person doesn’t get it? Or maybe you just need to get something done your way every now and then? For some people, a sense of urgency leads them to use some of these tactics:

speak louder

provide evidence

speak with a tone of urgency

refuse to drop the subject

follow the other person from room to room

However, these strategies create problems. A raised voice can sound like an attack. Evidence provides an opportunity to get distracted by discussing the evidence. Urgency often comes across as impatience or frustration.

If the conversation stays on track, you can keep trying to resolve the issue. If it turns into an argument, you might need a different strategy.

A groundbreaking strategy

One of the kids in our neighborhood has a great way of dealing with frustration when he can’t get his way. Like many six-year-olds, he loves to win. Little kids this age are often obsessed with winning, losing, and rules. If there’s a competition, Frankie obviously wants to win.

Of course, the ball doesn’t always bounce like that. When Frankie plays Four Square with his family, he sometimes misses a few returns. He doesn’t want to jeopardize his victory and his general good mood, so he just announces some new rules and does it with such humor that everyone laughs. This game – the one where Frankie always wins – is known as “Frankieball”.

Adults, or natural, need to apply more finesse. The game of “I win no matter what” isn’t so endearing when you’re twenty or maybe fifty.

Nevertheless, there is a middle way. When the game isn’t working—when discussions veer into contention—it helps to pause and consider some new rules. Sometimes it’s better not to play at all.

New plays

There are many ways to graciously step back from an argument. Here are four simple statements you can use to end an argument 99 percent of the time.

1. “Let me think about it.”

This works partly because it buys time. When you argue, your body prepares itself for a fight: your heart rate increases, your blood pressure increases, you might start sweating. In short, you fall into fight-or-flight mode. Marriage researcher John Gottman calls this “flooding”. Your mental focus narrows, so you think more about the danger ahead than about nuances and opportunities. Because of this, the ability to solve problems decreases.

If no lion is ready to pounce, floods will stand in your way. Taking time to think can help your body calm down. It also sends a message that you care enough to at least consider someone else’s point of view, which is comforting to the other person in the argument.

2. “Maybe you’re right.”

This works because it shows a willingness to compromise. This signal is enough to soften most people’s position and also allow them to step back.

Yet it’s hard to do. Sometimes my clients fear that tact is very close to yielding. From my point of view it’s mostly the opposite: acknowledging someone else’s point of view usually leads to softening. Check out some examples:

Comment: Blue jeans are not suitable for work.

Answer: You may be right.

Comment: This project will be delayed.

Answer: I’m working on it, but you might be right.

Comment: You didn’t handle that very well.

Answer: You may be right.

Note that with this Aikido-like fling, you are not agreeing that the other person is right. They are just acknowledging that there might be something to their point of view and implying that you will consider what they have said.

3. “I see.”

Those are powerful words. They work because they offer empathy. You end an argument by changing its direction—trying to get someone else’s point of view isn’t an argument. They are sometimes difficult to say because pausing to understand can sometimes feel like giving in. It is important to remember:

Understanding doesn’t mean you agree.

Understanding does not mean having to solve the problem.

With the pressure to get your way or get it out of the way, you can just listen.

4. “I’m sorry.”

These words are perhaps the most powerful in the English language. One admin I know says half his job is apologizing to people.

Many people hesitate to apologize because they fear that apologizing is an admission of guilt and acceptance of full responsibility. Unfortunately, this view often makes the problem worse.

Apologies sometimes just express sympathy and caring: “I’m sorry you didn’t get this job.”

More often, however, an apology means taking some responsibility: “I’m sorry my comment came out that way. I did not mean that.”

Sometimes an apology is an admission of full responsibility, and that’s when a heartfelt expression of regret becomes all the more important: “You’re right, I didn’t make it in time. I will do everything I can to ensure that this doesn’t happen again.” Apologies change the game from “It’s not my fault” to “I understand”. Apologies are powerful; They have averted lawsuits, improved business communications and closed personal rifts.

home run

Of course, avoiding an argument is only the first step in sorting out an emotionally charged topic. Sometimes you have to dig beneath the surface to be able to talk about the beliefs and feelings beneath. Then there is work to negotiate a compromise or reach an agreement. However, arguments go in circles and usually make the problem worse.

Sometimes the only way not to lose is to finish the game. Like Frankie, you can change the rules. Instead of “One of us has to win” you can play “Let’s take some time with this”. With a simple statement, you can buy time, show compromise, offer empathy, or take part in the problem. These strategies are the basis of good communication. If the object of the game is to stop arguing, both players can win.

Read on from author Pat LaDouceur, Ph.D.

Read in order of publication

Great leaders know how to use arguments. Instead of viewing disagreements as negative, they learn to use conflict as a means of improvement.

In addition, they learn the art of argumentation. They are good listeners, willingly admit when they are wrong, and genuinely try to get to the heart of the problem. Become a better leader by adopting these four habits.

1. Listen before you speak.

When someone is angry, it is crucial to give them time to explain their point of view. In the beginning, you find it difficult to stop and listen without interrupting with a solution. The next time you find yourself in a situation where someone is arguing, wait a full three seconds after his or her last sentence to speak. This encourages the person to keep talking, and if you listen, you’ll better understand what the problem is.

It’s amazing how much respect you gain and how much tension you can relieve by engaging in and listening to every argument. Great leaders build tremendous levels of respect by making their team members feel respected and valued. The easiest way to do this is to walk into any argument knowing that the best thing you can do to start is to shut your mouth and open your ears.

2. Take the blame and apologize.

Saying “I’m sorry” and “It’s my fault” are two of the best ways to get great results out of any argument. Often the person you are arguing with will explain to you why you did something wrong and he or she didn’t. For example, if your product doesn’t live up to its promise, your customer could explain why it’s your fault. In such cases, after allowing the customer to let off steam, you should immediately say, “I’m sorry, that’s my fault.” The beauty of this phrase is that it ends the blame game and helps move the argument into a more productive phase.

This also works well for internal team arguments. When leaders take the blame, they build respect and prevent damage to team relationships. Great leaders make the sacrifice of making the mistake so that they can bring the argument to a positive outcome.

3. Ask questions.

The cause of a dispute is rarely on the surface. The challenge is to search the argument to discover the true root of the problem. Great leaders are exceptional at this because they ask a ridiculous number of questions. The next time you get into an argument, use the five whys rule. Keep asking why this happened and at the last why you will discover where the real problem lies. Another benefit is that through this process, the person you are arguing with also discovers the real problem. Once you both can agree on the actual problem to be solved, it becomes much easier to work together towards a solution.

4. Work together.

I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but everyone’s been getting a little rowdy lately, whether it’s about world politics, your Twitter feed, or something meant as a quick drink after work.

There are few things more tiring than being confronted with someone who insists on discussing the relative merits of Jeremy Corbyn/Donald Trump after five craft ales, but when you’re faced with a combative situation, fine knowing how to take care of yourself.

Enter: psychology and the simple tricks that can help you walk away a winner.

Try the “Socratic method”.

A technique that sounds more intimidating than it actually is, the Socratic method involves questioning people to challenge differing viewpoints. Still sounds complicated? Suppose your partner is quite upset that you didn’t make it home for dinner and you crawl in drunk at 2am. Instead of engaging in a roaring match where you deny all allegations, instead ask questions like “How does that feel?”, “What would you rather be doing?”

This works on two levels. First, let your partner express what they’re feeling, which means releasing resentments instead of storing them up. Second, it shows that you’re listening and care about how someone else is feeling by making them feel considered. Give it a try, but don’t overdo it to avoid that 6-year-old-on-a-long-travel vibe.

Use positive words

During a tiff, the red fog often takes over and our speech becomes more emphatic. However, overly open and forceful arguments can weaken your position in the eyes of others instead of convincing them of your point of view.

Research by graduate students at Cornell University analyzed two years of posts on the ChangeMyView subReddit, a forum where people make arguments to change someone’s mind.

The results of the study concluded that “people who post calmer and more positive words like ‘help’ and ‘please’ are more malleable. This applies when they post more adjectives ‘, ‘none’ and ‘best’.”

It even went so far as to put people off by harsh-sounding words: “Using ‘calm’ language to say something is more effective than swearing or using aggressive language – sounds like ‘librarian’ and ‘boring’ than.” hard, ‘sharp’ words like ‘terrorism’ and ‘erection’.”

So no talk of erections, ok?

And remember, as Caitlin Moran wrote in an essay about winning online disputes, “If a conversation starts out angry, it will almost certainly continue angry and end up apoplectic.”

Exaggerate your opponent’s position

According to Arthur Schopenhauer, author of The Art of Being Right, one way to reduce the effectiveness of your partner’s arguments is to take their position beyond what they’re saying and expand on their position.

“The more general your opponent’s statement becomes,” he says, “the more objections you can find to it. The more limited and narrow your own claims remain, the easier it is to defend them.”

This means you can take your argument far beyond the intended point and then demonstrate how ridiculous and unreasonable the overblown position is. For example, if someone argues that eating meat is bad for the environment, you might point out that even things like flushing the toilet and using public transportation are bad for the environment.

Check your threatening body language

You might think that staring intensely at someone is one way to show someone you mean business, but a recent paper published by the University of British Columbia argues that eye contact increases resistance to persuasion. The study concluded that:

“Deliberately maintaining direct eye contact resulted in less persuasion than looking at the mouth. These results suggest that efforts to increase eye contact can be counterproductive in a variety of persuasion contexts.”

Body language expert Jennifer Rigdon has listed other gestures to avoid. “Sit or stand in a manner that is similar to the person you are speaking to, this will make you appear open and nonthreatening. But be careful not to hold anything in your hands. Holding a phone or even a pen could make you seem withdrawn.”

Use the anchor effect

According to attorney John Curtis, the anchoring effect means that “often in negotiations, the party that makes the first move – whether it’s a proposed solution or an offer – wins. That means the solution ends up being closer to its original position. Why? Because they anchored the conversation.”

Several studies have shown that initial offers have a greater impact on the outcome of negotiations than later counter-offers. So if you’re arguing about something you specifically want, say it first and jump deep into what you want, rather than slow down.

This content is created and maintained by a third party and imported to this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may find more information about this and similar content on piano.io

Things don’t always go smoothly in life, and when you hit a bump, the temptation to yell at others can explode. Don’t do it – a raised voice is one of the biggest swords you can put in the stomach of your own business or general goals! Here’s what makes yelling so destructive and self-sabotaging.

How screaming can be an advantage

From an evolutionary perspective, raising your voice is prewired in the brain’s limbic system and amygdala as part of the survival instinct. It’s a basic method of trying to assert dominance and deal with a perceived threat. That’s why people scream at fist fights or at the strange dog in the yard that freaks them out. When these types of situations arise, your fight-or-flight stress response kicks in and adrenaline shoots through your body as a protective mechanism to get you through.

Think out of control

But guess what. You can also engage your limbic system in reasoning and evaluation as you respond to external events. This is what most people in the office deal with. For example, you might be thinking, “How could John and Jane leave me to do all the work on this report? They’re such lousy, stupid people!” Or maybe John or Jane says something offensive to you and you think, “How dare they! They have no right to talk to me like that!” You are essentially working yourself up. The fight-or-flight response is greenlit and your defensive behaviors, including yelling, are all systems.

And guess how the person you’re yelling at is reacting in their brain. Yes. You are now a threat. Their limbic system also kicks in and they freeze or are about to scream.

Bye, rational thinking

Yelling would be bad enough if everything being yelled was perfectly true and reasonable. But once the stress response kicks in, the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for executive functions like decision-making and planning, begins to shut down. The emotion centers of the limbic system take over, and instead of really thinking critically, you become driven by your feelings. Again, this is to protect you – you would be toasted if you thought through a charging lion. But in an everyday argument, it’s incredibly difficult to process what the other person is saying in a really factual manner. Essentially, you no longer stop listening to one another or finding appropriate responses, and the pain that accompanies screaming lingers as a deeper, more meaningful memory.

The icing on the unfortunate cupcake is that it takes at least 20 minutes for the chemicals released during the stress response — cortisol, for example — to leave the body. On a busy day, this means arguments can potentially disrupt entire meetings or delay productivity. You have a fair amount of time before you can talk calmly in person, on the phone, or via other technology, and you run the risk of saying and doing things that you may later regret.

Braking an aggressive maul

Given how this all works, it almost goes without saying that yelling doesn’t do much and is ineffective as a form of employee discipline. In order not to fall into the scream trap,

Mentally acknowledge how you’re feeling because of what the other person said or did, or because of your general circumstances (ever yelled at someone who didn’t deserve it for just being “there” and you needed to vent ?).

because of what the other person said or did, or because of your general circumstances (ever yelled at someone who didn’t deserve it for just being “there” and you needed to vent?). Verbally acknowledge that you see how the other person is feeling and offer validation and empathy.

, offer validation and empathy. Offer a warning before talking about potentially triggering issues wherever you can. For example, you could clarify in an email that you want to discuss some performance issues or a major policy change before meeting about it.

where you can For example, you could clarify in an email that you want to discuss some performance issues or a major policy change before meeting about it. Schedule your toughest discussions at times of the day when you’re usually full of energy and high spirits.

Intentionally lower your voice so your listener has to focus on your words.

So your listener needs to focus on your words. Think of a mantra or phrase to keep you from going down a path of negative, defensive thoughts. For example, you might think, “My goal is not to fight, it’s too x,” “These are trainees who still need my guidance,” or “Their screaming is a signal that they feel threatened, and that’s mine Task Show them I’m not a threat.”

For example, you might think, “My goal is not to fight, it’s too x,” “These are trainees who still need my guidance,” or “Their screaming is a signal that they feel threatened, and that’s mine Task Show them I’m not a threat.” Admit that you’re emotionally hot and tell others you need a short break before proceeding. Be positive in your request to stop, such as ” I know we can work this out if I have a minute to breathe and think.”

Have you ever heard an argument or statement presented as fact that just didn’t ring true?

Perhaps the statement seemed to come to a wild conclusion, or the argument put forward was based on evidence that could not be easily validated or was taken out of context.

These kinds of statements are often referred to as logical fallacies. Essentially, an argument built on flawed reasoning that – if you apply logic – turns out to be wrong.

Logical fallacies can be persuasive and are often used in rhetoric to encourage people to think a certain way or to believe certain things. So we have to be careful and question the things we hear that don’t quite “ring true”.

In this article, we’ll learn about the different types of fallacies that can be used, what they are, and how to spot them.

Don’t be fooled by logical fallacies! View the transcript for this video here.

What are logical fallacies?

A logical fallacy is a statement that appears to be true until you apply the rules of logic. Then you realize that’s not the case. Logical fallacies can often be used to mislead people – to make them believe something they would not otherwise believe.

For example, consider the following statement:

“In a study designed by a famous scientist to test the effect of pleasant images on motivation, employees were shown images of baby animals and beautiful natural scenes for the first five minutes at work.

“Amazingly, the results showed a 10 percent jump in profits in the first quarter and record revenue for the year. So, showing people pleasant images is a great way to motivate them and increase productivity.”

What do you think of the argument you just read? do you believe the conclusion

You shouldn’t.

The argument contains a number of logical fallacies. But don’t worry if you believe the conclusion: the passage contains some very common (and effective) tactics for manipulating reason and logic.

The ability to distinguish a valid argument from a false one is an important skill. This is a key aspect of critical thinking and can help you avoid falling for fake news.

If you’ve fallen for a logical fallacy, wrong conclusions could lead you to make decisions you later regret. And using a logical fallacy in your own arguments can make you appear gullible or uninformed. Worse, it can make you appear dishonest.

Note: Logical fallacies are sometimes confused with cognitive biases, but they are not the same. A cognitive bias is a tendency to make decisions or act in illogical ways caused by our values, memory, socialization, and other personal characteristics.

Now let’s examine some of the most common logical fallacies people use so you can spot them and understand how to challenge them when you encounter them.

Examples of logical fallacies

Do you remember the example above? It relied on two of the most common fallacies in logic: appeals to authority and false inductions. Let’s take a closer look at both.

appeals to authority

Here you are relying on an “expert” source to form the basis of your argument. In the example above, the source that appears to be knowledgeable is “a famous academic”. Mention of an academic usually implies authority and expertise, and that your argument is supported by rigorous research. The effect is even stronger if you use a real name.

But attribution alone is not enough to “prove” your case. Even if the academic is genuine and their research is genuine, it may not necessarily support your argument — it may be misquoted, misunderstood, taken out of context, or contain important caveats that undermine the point you are trying to make.

Try not to rely too heavily on the authority of a single expert or on a single source of data.

Wrong inductions

False induction is often referred to as “non sequitur”, which translates from Latin as “it does not follow”. This fallacy leads you to infer a causal relationship where none is obvious. Just because something happened before something else doesn’t mean there’s a logical, causal connection between the two.

In our example, showing employees pleasant images may or may not be associated with improved company performance. Many other factors could have played a role.

It also concludes that improved productivity is the result of increased motivation. This is another wrong induction. The example does not show at all whether the pleasant images had a direct effect on motivation and thus productivity.

Other common logical fallacies

The example above uses two types of fallacies, but there are many other logical fallacies that you may have encountered in your workplace or more generally. Here are six other common logical fallacies.

The slippery slope

The inclined plane argument rests on your thinking that the worst that can happen will actually happen if you choose a certain course of action. Of course, this is not necessarily the case.

Example “If we allow Susan to leave earlier, we will soon be freeing up all Friday afternoons.”

Such arguments come up often. But if you examine the example more closely, you can see that it’s illogical to conclude that you really have to give everyone an afternoon off each week just by allowing one employee to leave early one time.

The bandwagon fallacy

This is where you are tricked into believing in an idea or suggestion simply because it is popular or has a lot of support. But the fact that many people agree with something doesn’t make it true or right.

Example “We surveyed all the customers in the store and everyone agreed that it would be a good idea to be open 24 hours a day. We need to create a 24-hour schedule as soon as possible.”

In fact, you need to ask a few more questions before you can draw any conclusion from an informal survey like this one.

For example: Who were these people? Would you actually buy something in the store at 2 a.m.? If yes, how often? What are the costs compared to the benefits of such a plan?

At the same time, remember that just because many people believe something doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Always try to think critically and don’t be guided by forceful arguments.

Note: The “Appeal to Tradition” fallacy is similar to the train wagon fallacy. Here the argument focuses on something that has “always” been done or is a widely accepted practice. For example: “We’ve always hired the CEO from among the ranks. When we look outward, there’s too much disagreement and discord.”

The Fallacy of the False Dichotomy

The fallacy of the false dichotomy relies on an “either/or” argument: you only offer two options and force people to choose between them. In fact, neither option can be the best, and many other options may be available. But the argument makes it seem like the proposed option is the only viable one.

Example “We as a board can either choose to approve this IPO or we can be slowly annihilated by our competitors.”

In this example, there are almost certainly other options that the Board might consider. And is raising capital even the answer to improving or maintaining the company’s competitive position?

The strawman fallacy

The strawman fallacy is about making up a false argument and then refuting it. The counter-argument is then taken to be true. By misrepresenting an opponent’s position (and then knocking it down), your own preferred position appears stronger.

Example A local politician plans to expand the community’s cycling network and add several new speed cameras in densely populated areas. Her opponent says: “They want us all to give up driving forever. They are punishing the honest car owners and commuters who help pay these politicians’ salaries.”

By arguing that the proposed changes were an attack on motorists, opponents slammed the position much more easily than if they had tried to address the real concerns the proposal addresses – in this case, an increase in deaths from traffic accidents and degree of pollution.

Note: Do not confuse a strawman argument with a strawman proposal. A strawman suggestion is a popular problem-solving concept where you start with a half-finished idea and intentionally poke “holes” in it to arrive at a better end product. Unlike a strawman argument, a strawman suggestion is an effective process when used with clear and honest intentions.

The No True Scotsman fallacy

Sometimes referred to as an “appeal to purity,” this is a way of dismissing flaws in or criticism of an argument.

No matter how persuasive the counterargument may be, the person making the fallacy “moves the goalposts” and shifts the terms of the argument so that the contradictory evidence does not hold.

Example Andy says a Scot would never put sugar on his porridge. Dougal replies that he’s Scottish and puts sugar on his porridge. Andy replies that no true Scotsman puts sugar on their porridge. Andy therefore changes the terms of the argument, implying that Dougal is not a “true” Scotsman, to support his own position.

observation selection

That means emphasizing the positive aspects of an idea and ignoring the negative ones. You try to make your argument more convincing by only telling half the truth.

Example “I know that our TV advertising is more effective than radio. The numbers show that we reach twice as many viewers with TV, and our focus groups remember the TV commercial 38 percent better than the radio show.”

What this argument doesn’t address is the cost and return on investment of television advertising compared to radio. Does the 38% increase in customer retention translate to sales conversions? What percentage of radio listeners versus TV viewers actually buy the product?

It’s easy to fall into observational selection when you’re attached to an idea, especially if you helped generate it.

The fallacy of “statistics of small numbers” is a similar concept. This is where you take an observation and draw a general conclusion from it.

For example: “I would never use Gaudi Brothers to supply our paper products.

This opinion is based on a bad experience and does not necessarily mean that the company is always unreliable. Perhaps the purchasing company was late in placing orders or late in paying its bills.

Do you find this article useful? You can learn another 44 problem-solving skills by joining the Mind Tools Club. Join the Mind Tools Club today!

Subscribe to our newsletter Receive new career skills every week, also receive our latest offers and a free downloadable Personal Development Plan workbook. Read our privacy policy

How to avoid logical fallacies

To spot logical fallacies, you need a basic understanding of how an argument works. In logic, an argument is a set of propositions where one proposition is derived from the other (or others). There are two types of statements:

Premises are statements offered to provide evidence for the conclusion of an argument.

are statements offered to provide evidence for the conclusion of an argument. Conclusions are statements derived from the evidence presented.

For an argument to be valid or logical, the premises must fully support the conclusion. You do this in one of two ways:

1. With deductive reasoning

Here you start from general premises and come to a concrete, safe conclusion.

Example Premise 1: Trucan Supply decided it would limit its layoffs to just the New York facility to minimize redundancy costs. Premise 2: Trucan employee Tom received a notice of termination. Conclusion: Tom works at the facility in New York.

2. Use of inductive reasoning

Here one starts from concrete premises and comes to a generalized conclusion. This “bottom-up” logic uses premises to arrive at a conclusion that is probable but not certain. (Read our article on inductive reasoning to learn more about it.)

Example premise 1: April promotions in the last five years have increased sales by an average of 15 percent. Premise 2: Summer campaigns did not lead to any measurable increase in sales during this period. Conclusion: In order to increase sales, this year’s campaign should better take place in April instead of in the summer.

To check that an argument presented to you has solid logical basis, apply these two tests. If it does, you can rest assured that the argument has merit. If not, request more information and supporting evidence.

infographic

You can see our fallacies infographic here: