Posted on 02/11/2016 1:11:14 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[SNIP]
THE BEST WAYS TO WIN AN ARGUMENT EVERY TIME
Timing:Typically, the first person to reply to the thread has a greater chance of swinging the original person's (OP) view than someone who joins the debate later on.
Alternative terminology:Use words that are different to those used in the post.
For example,if discussing climate change,describing it as global warming in a reply makes more of an impact than using the same terminology as the OP.
Use calm language:The study suggests using 'calm' language to make a point is more effective than swearing or using aggressive terms.
In the paper,examples of 'calm' words include those that are softer-sounding such as 'librarian' and 'dull' than harsh,'sharp' words such as 'terrorism' and 'erection.'
Length:Longer replies in general also tend to be seen as more persuasive.
Evidence:Using numbers,statistics and examples to back up opinions make people sound more convincing.
To push this point,commenters should specifically write 'e.g','for instance' or 'i.e' before presenting these arguments to strengthen their persuasiveness.
Links:Quotes and quotation marks play little role in trying to convince someone,but linking to examples and outside sources does.
Hedge your bets:Hedges indicate uncertainty,and an example is:'It could be the case'.
Although this sounds like it might signal a weaker argument,the researchers said it may make an argument easier to accept by softening its tone.
Check the language in the original post:People can 'pick their battles' and decide whether or not it's worth engaging in an argument by studying the terms used by the OP.
Personal pronouns, such as 'I' suggest a person is more open-minded to persuasion, but the use of the words 'we' and 'us' suggests they are more stubborn.
Stubborn people use more emotive and decisive words including 'certain','nothing' and 'best.'
Know when to give up:Finally,the researchers found that after four or five 'back and forth' posts have been made, the chances of swaying someone's view significantly drops.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Liberals are impervious to facts. They believe tht if the facts contradict their narrow little ideology, the facts re WRONG!
The also believe that truth is whatever serves the Party and that if you repeat something often enough, it becomes true. And that it’s OK to lie if it serves their narrow little ideology.
You should seek immediate medical help for a librarian lasting more than four hours.
Yes, that is much more persuasive.
THIS IS ALL TOTALLY WRONG!
The idiots didn’t mention name calling and diversion. We know better than the stupid author and study group. You win an argument with salacious personal attacks, agregious sarcasm and insults. FACTS DON’T MATTER! Only idiots argue with facts. And make sure you can change the topic and or your position and point if one line of details starts to weaken. AGAIN, mix in some name calling here.
I know how to win an argument, like this one, for instance.
;o)
lol. I've been inspired, discussted, tickled and pursuaded at different times based on arguments on FR. By and large, when it is not an election season, there are a lot of very intelligent folks that post here. There is often times a lot to learn. You learn real fast, if you are going to take an adverse position, you better be able to put up or shut up with some facts and data. FReepers sniff out BS pretty quick.
That said, during an election season, FReepers seem to degenerate into mind numbing tunnel rats obsessed with cheese. Blinders and beer around here lately. Facts be damned, full tilt emotion, insult at will, take no prisoners. Anyone that doesn't like my guy/gal for president is too stupid to live and is a closet liberal that should go post on DU.
Nothing constructive is argued until after January 2017.
When bereft of evidence, substitute “gut feeling,” “obviously,” and “everyone knows.”
It seems to me it is in
how not to argue. :)
How to win arguments is outside the province of science.
Ad hominem attacks say more about the attacker, than the attackee. They say the person who resorts to ad hominem has a weak argument.
This is one of the pre-requisites...
93% of people find that the inclusion of statistics, phony or not, helps a lot.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.