How to Win an Argument

[Assent]

(Note to Moderators: I am unsure where to put a debate about debating, so I have defaulted to here. Move at your discretion)

Dale Carnegie has written what may be among the greatest works about human interaction, How to Win Friends and Influence People. I would like to bring up one particular chapter, entitled "How to Win an Argument." His one sentence answer? Don't get in one!

Carnegie then goes on to relate a personal anecdote about the topic: He and a friend were attending a dinner party when one of the other guests related a quote and attributed it to the Bible. Carnegie knew that the guest was wrong; the quote was from Shakespeare, and so he corrected the guest. The guest insisted that he was right instead, and that the quote was most certainly from the Bible. In response, Carnegie turned to his friend, someone whom he knew was an expert in Shakespeare. The friend's response?

"The guest is right. The quote is from the Bible." Dumbfounded, Carnegie did not continue to debate. After the party ended, he asked his friend why he had said such, since they both knew full well that the quote was from Shakespeare. His friend responded that he knew that his expert opinion would not have dissuaded the mistaken guest, but rather galvanized him into arguing further, ruining an otherwise pleasant party.

The implications are, I think, obvious. Offensive behavior breeds defensive behavior, and turns a meeting of two minds into a conflict between them. No answers can be found in such a conflict; even if a combatant were to admit to him/herself afterwards that his/her opinion was mistaken, during the conflict, when pride is on the line, no step backwards can be taken.

This is not to say that a reasoned debate is impossible without resulting (or beginning) in this form. All it takes is a willingness to admit to oneself that one may be incorrect about one's opinion, an admission which is far, far easier to reach when one's "opponent" is equally willing. It is far too easy for even the most reasonable of people to take a defensive stance when facing an immobile foe. All it takes to end the cycle, however (except against the most stubborn of enemies), is to admit that one's position may be incorrect.

What I wish to do now, then, is to debate the efficacy of debate. Is my position correct? Does the adversarial method have its benefits? Do you think I am specifically speaking to you? By all means, speak up!

[McCulloch]

Call the other side a fool, and then censor their reply.

No, that is the sure way to lose the debate. Or at least to demonstrate to all of the readers and lurkers that you have lost the debate.