Win your argument!!!

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Hi,

Feeling the need to gird your loins (!) with more intellectual weaponry? Try these 38 for size (maybe not the abuse one though).

I'll be looking out for them in the forums (or perhaps you could put the reference numbers next to your posts?)

1 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 your own propositions remain, the easier they are to defend.

2 Use different meanings of your opponent's words to refute his argument.
Example: Person A says, "You do not understand the mysteries of Kant's philosophy."
Person B replies, "Of, if it's mysteries you're talking about, I'll have nothing to do with them."

3 Ignore your opponent's proposition, which was intended to refer to some particular thing.
Rather, understand it in some quite different sense, and then refute it.
Attack something different than what was asserted.


...and so on...

schopeng.<br>htm: Thirty - Eight Ways to Win an Argument, by Schopenhauer

s.



 

Paladin

Purchased Bewilderment
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
2
Points
38
Location
Washington
Never did like that ol curmudgeon, or his fallacies of logic, but these techniques are already in use throughout the forum Snoop:D
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
Kindest Regards!

Hi,

Feeling the need to gird your loins (!) with more intellectual weaponry? Try these 38 for size (maybe not the abuse one though).

I'll be looking out for them in the forums (or perhaps you could put the reference numbers next to your posts?)

1 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 your own propositions remain, the easier they are to defend.

2 Use different meanings of your opponent's words to refute his argument.
Example: Person A says, "You do not understand the mysteries of Kant's philosophy."
Person B replies, "Of, if it's mysteries you're talking about, I'll have nothing to do with them."

3 Ignore your opponent's proposition, which was intended to refer to some particular thing.
Rather, understand it in some quite different sense, and then refute it.
Attack something different than what was asserted.


...and so on...

schopeng.<br>htm: Thirty - Eight Ways to Win an Argument, by Schopenhauer

s.




Ahhh! What's this? The antithesis of the list of logical fallacies? Or the creative use of same?

Who said ignorance is bliss? :D

Thanks for the warning, Snoopy!

Boy oh boy, that page sure reads like courtroom 101. I can just imagine a laundry list of n'er-do-well lawyers and ambulance chasers employing these very tactics.
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Hi,

Well I think I had a tongue-in-cheek kind of feeling when I posted this! To me, a war of words (like all war) is never the answer.

On another forum (not as enlightening and sociable* as CR I hasten to add!) there used to be a very, ahem, belligerent person who on his own website had an article providing a long list of suggestions for destroying other people's opinions. When I posted it on the forum he wasn't best pleased. (sg knows who I mean...)

s.

*mostly!
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
I remember some of this stuff from High School debate team. (We had a Forensics squad, speech and debate competition, I took part more in the entertaining stuff rather than formal debate) This is the seemy, underhanded stuff though, the kind of tactics a desperate person resorts to when they haven't a legitimate hope to stand with.
 

seattlegal

Mercuræn Buddhist
Messages
6,877
Reaction score
275
Points
83
Location
Pacific Ring of Fire
"All warfare is based on deception. If your enemy is superior, evade him. If angry, irritate him. If equally matched, fight and if not: split and re-evaluate,"
--Sun Tzu, The Art of War
 

seattlegal

Mercuræn Buddhist
Messages
6,877
Reaction score
275
Points
83
Location
Pacific Ring of Fire
Hi,

Well I think I had a tongue-in-cheek kind of feeling when I posted this! To me, a war of words (like all war) is never the answer.

On another forum (not as enlightening and sociable* as CR I hasten to add!) there used to be a very, ahem, belligerent person who on his own website had an article providing a long list of suggestions for destroying other people's opinions. When I posted it on the forum he wasn't best pleased. (sg knows who I mean...)

s.

*mostly!
Isn't that how and where this whole fish-slapping business started out?
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Hi,

What an epiphany! You're right!

The wondrous circularity of it all! Such unwholesome vipaka was reaped!

How interconnected is it all...


OK that's enough clap-trap...

Yeah, you're right.:p he he

s.
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
"All warfare is based on deception. If your enemy is superior, evade him. If angry, irritate him. If equally matched, fight and if not: split and re-evaluate,"
--Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Excellent book! Read it for a business management class.

BTW, I would add, "if all else fails, cheat." At least, that is the underlying essence of the points in the OP.
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Hi,

A recommendation from Gordon Gecko is certainly one of which to take note.:eek:

I keep a copy so that if I'm losing an argument I can suddenly flourish it and proceed to smack the person over the head with it.

s.

(avatar comes from fishy friend)
 

seattlegal

Mercuræn Buddhist
Messages
6,877
Reaction score
275
Points
83
Location
Pacific Ring of Fire
Hi,

A recommendation from Gordon Gecko is certainly one of which to take note.:eek:

I keep a copy so that if I'm losing an argument I can suddenly flourish it and proceed to smack the person over the head with it.

s.

(avatar comes from fishy friend)
The Secular version of "bible thumping?" {Fish are more fun.} :p
 

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
The Secular version of "bible thumping?" {Fish are more fun.} :p

Hi,

Heck, I thought bible thumping was bible-fist contact, not bible-head contact. Would that not result in loss of consciousness rather than conversion?

(and fish are more versatile at meal times!!)

s.
 

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
8,172
Reaction score
446
Points
83
Location
up to my arse in alligators
A recommendation from Gordon Gecko is certainly one of which to take note.:eek:
Is that the one with the British accent who does the car insurance commercials? Love the scale Austin he drives.

"(or perhaps you could put the reference numbers next to your posts?) -Snoopy"
<Schop. #3>
 
Last edited:

Snoopy

zennish
Messages
5,317
Reaction score
45
Points
48
sorry Juan, couldn't resist the childish impulse!:) ;) :eek:

s.
 

cyberpi

Interfaith Forums
Messages
1,437
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Feeling the need to gird your loins (!) with more intellectual weaponry?
Is it Schopenhauer who teaches that his brain is in his loins and it's purpose is combat... or is it just the belief of his disciples? Examining the evidence: << (Schop 21)... "For it is with victory that you are concerned, not with truth." >> I leave the answer to you Snoopy, but Schopenhauer teaches that his Intelligence has no concern for Truth.

Maybe: 21, 26, 16, 35, 3, 5, 6, and a few gems that are far beyond Schopenhauer. :D
 
Top