Set Your Goals Cicero’s Lightbulb— Change the Audience’s Mood, Mind, or Willingness to Act.

Fighting vs. arguing… -There is a big difference between “fighting” and “arguing”. -The goal of a fight is to win. It ends with one person vanquished and one victorious. -The goals of an argument is to “win over” your opponent. The endgame is to get your desired result and leave everyone happy. -Oftentimes, it is preferable to “argue” than to “fight”.

Fighting vs. arguing (cont.)… -It is key to distinguish between an argument and a fight and to consider what you want to get out of the exchange. -John Gottman’s research at the University of Washington— -Couples who stay married argued as much as those who divorce. -The difference is in how they argued; how they saw the outcome. -You succeed in your argument when you persuade the audience.

Fighting vs. arguing (cont.)… -Use to your advantage the common misconception that “fighting” and “arguing” are the same thing…“fighting”. -Remember…oftentimes you win by “losing”. **Important Term** -eristic—the type of debating that is solely concerned with winning points.

Fighting vs. arguing (cont.)… **Important Term** -Concessio—the formal name for concession. Concede your opponent’s point in order to get what you want. Marcus Tullius Cicero—Three Goals for Persuading People 1) Stimulate your audience’s emotions. 2) Change its opinion. 3) Get it to act.

Three goals for persuasion… Joke— A—“How many psychiatrists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?” B—“I don’t know. How many does it take?” A—“First, the bulb has to want to change!” …or, it can be persuaded to change!

Three goals for persuasion… Start by changing its mood. -Make the bulb feel how scary it is to sit in the dark. Then, change its mind. -Convince the bulb that the answer is to get into the socket. Finally, fill it with the desire to act. -Show the bulb how easy it is to get into the socket. (Remember…convincing someone to act is the most difficult part!)

Three goals for persuasion… “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.” The third goal—motivating action to either do something or stop doing something—is the greatest challenge. For example, consider “Get Out The Vote” campaigns. -How do they work? -How successful are they?

How to win an argument.. Focus on Influencing your opponent…not proving them wrong. Remember…an argument is two-sided. The way you compose yourself will contribute to the overall outcome. Listen actively…show that you understand your opponent by reiterating a summary of their points. -This will show that you understand their point of view.

How to win an argument (cont.)… Keep it friendly and show empathy…smile and show that you are concerned about their side of the issue. 1 Give your argument validity…explain the specific details that prove the outcome that you want. 2 Stay calm…instead of raising your voice, take strategic pauses for dramatic effect. 3 How to win an argument (cont.)…

How to win an argument (cont.)… Come in for the attack… Consider Schopenhauer’s 38 Stratagems; or, 38 ways to win an argument. http://www.mnei.nl/schopenhauer/38-stratagems.htm

How to win an argument…. Schopenhauer claimed that our world is driven by a continually dissatisfied will, continually seeking satisfaction. Much like in Buddhism, Schopenhauer saw life as suffering; the root of suffering is desire, or will; to escape suffering, the will (or desire) must be extinguished through work and asceticism.

How to win an argument… Carry your opponent's proposition beyond its natural limits; exaggerate it. The more general your opponent's statement becomes, the more objections you can find against it. The more restricted and narrow his or her propositions remain, the easier they are to defend by him or her.

Cont. -Ignore your opponent's proposition, which was intended to refer to a particular thing. Rather, understand it in some quite different sense, and then refute it. Attack something different than that which was asserted. -When your opponent puts forth a proposition, find it inconsistent with his or her other statements, beliefs, actions, or lack of action.

Cont. -Should your opponent expressly challenge you to produce any objection to some definite point in his or her argument, and you have nothing much to say, try to make the argument less specific. -If your opponent has admitted to all or most of your premises, do not ask him or her directly to accept your conclusion. Rather draw the conclusion yourself as if it too had been admitted.

Cont. -If your opponent is making a generalization, find an instance to the contrary. Only one valid contradiction is needed to overthrow the opponent's proposition. - If you succeed in making your opponent's opinion, should it prove true, seem distinctly to his or her own interest, the opponent will drop it like a hot potato.

Videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJDN3PKZ1 KE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5OdpPod pNY

Questions for Discussion… -Which of Gottman’s points is the most interesting? Why? -What do you think of the reply, “Interesting point. Tell me more.”? -Gottman says science proves that contempt in a relationship it toxic. How do you feel about that? -Does Gottman’s use of scientific facts add to the persuasiveness of his argument? How about his humor?