How to Be a Better Arguer

If you're anything like me, you argue because you want to win people over to your side, to be right, to show them the light. But think about it: Does it ever really work? Not for me. Thankfully, experts have come

How to Be a Better Arguer

If you're anything like me, you argue because you want to win people over to your side, to be right, to show them the light. But think about it: Does it ever really work? Not for me. Thankfully, experts have come up with a remedy. As they suggest, arguers should win people over by dialing down the aggression.

A few years ago two American philosophy scholars wrote a paper on human reasoning and argumentation theory. The theme is fully demonstrated every time candidates debate: “People who have an opinion to defend don't really evaluate others' arguments in a search for genuine information but rather consider them from the start as counterarguments to be refuted.” In other words, if you're too busy trying to push your own opinion, you're apt to ignore even the most reasonable evidence and arguments your opponent presents. On the other hand, the researchers wrote, “in group reasoning experiments where participants share an interest in discovering the right answer, it has been shown that truth wins." I can't agree. more.

In a heated argument, it's tough to picture everything working out well in the end with your opponent. Yet remaining hopeful may actually help that happen, says Susan Whitbourne, a professor of psychology. Her studies of international conflict resolution have found that when leaders believe peace is possible, that outlook brings about compromise, a willingness to forgive and less retaliation. In short, a sense of hope allows arguers to think more clearly. You may not win the dispute, but you might be able to bring it to a fair conclusion.

Some arguments may be more about knee-jerk reactions than actual, real disagreement. There are patterns of actions and reactions in relationship “systems” that tend to play out over and over again. “'In systems theory, the system tries to maintain dynamic balance," Susan Whitbourne notes. To resolve these kinds of tug of-war arguments, we need to break out of the system by thinking and even acting outside the box. Doing or saying the unexpected may feel strange or even fake at first, she says, but *behaving in a way that's counter to what’s usual throws the other person off the pattern and thereby allows reframing.”

Defensiveness can mislead an argument into a spiral of pure negative emotion. But a genuine laugh or smile can completely ease a tense situation and help turn it around. It has worked for me: I remember a quarrel I got into with my husband a couple of years ago. In the middle of exchanging angry words, I simply burst out, smiling but truthful: “I'm just tired of your face! It's always in my face! Gah!" I started laughing. He cracked up, too. We both realized that we weren't really arguing about anything and merely needed some alone time.

It's clear to me now that no matter how strongly I feel about something, the goal of arguing shouldn't be to win at all costs, with loud talking, complaining, even intimidation. A better, more satisfying end game of any argument is to find some commonality. Then, somehow, everybody wins.

I. Introduction (Paragraph 1)
A. People argue in order to win.
B. Thesis: Arguers should win people over by dialing down the aggression.
II. Adopt moderate approaches to argue effectively. (Paragraphs 2-5)
A. Evaluate your opponent’s views objectively.
B. Remain hopeful about a sensible settlement.
C. Resolve arguments from a new perspective.
D. Ease a tense situation with a laugh or smile.
III. Conclusion: Arguers should seek common ground to achieve a win-win result.
(Paragraph 6)