It is necessary to use some skills in the debate. Knowing some skills can make us win better. The following are my collected debating skills on how to soften the opponent's position in the debate. Welcome to reading. Please continue to pay attention to the debate column for more information!
The debate stems from opposition. The opposition of the debate is decided by drawing lots; The daily debate is different, and its opposition is determined by the psychological, logical (rational) and emotional (emotional) States of both sides in real life. The opposition in the debate is decided by the judges' scoring, and the opposition in the daily debate is usually resolved by both sides of the debate. Debate contests are mainly conducted in the form of language (pronunciation); However, the daily debate does not necessarily have a complete language (pronunciation) form, and often depends on eyes, expressions, body movements and so on. (generalized language).
Obviously, in the daily debate, we should avoid losing control of the debate and try to soften the opposition. The most fundamental way to soften objections is: yes? Talk without arguing? Psychology. This kind of psychology can be divided into? Not arguing? Psychology? Does all this make sense? Psychological and? Equality? Psychology.
First,? Not arguing? intelligence
What is the debate? Want to argue? Psychologically, if you can't argue, try to find opposition, intensify opposition, and defeat each other in opposition. The daily debate is different. Its purpose is to soften the opposition, and both sides can resolve the opposition, so it demands? Not arguing? Psychology, no arguing, no arguing.
1. Never forget to simplify opposites. In the daily debate, we should always pay attention to whether the opposition still maintains its original content. It will be difficult to soften too many new opposing views into the debate. My daughter didn't come home until late at night. Mom asked:? Can't you go home early? My daughter was very tired and upset because she worked overtime temporarily, and said, Always talking too much. ? Mom is angry: Well, I care about you. You can't believe I talk too much. Just like your father, you deliberately opposed me. ? The daughter loves her father very much and says, what's wrong with her father? Go to work, go to work after work, how can you go shopping all day like nothing happened? The initial opposition between mother and daughter was whether the daughter should go home early. This opposition is easy to soften. A mother cares about her daughter, and her daughter has a legitimate reason to go home late. Just make it clear. However, as the two sides constantly introduce new opposites: whether the mother talks too much and who the parents are, the problem is complicated.
2. Pay attention to withdraw from the debate in due course. Since the purpose of daily debate is to soften the opposition rather than defeat it, we should withdraw from the debate at an appropriate time. For example, when one side has no arguments, when one side's emotions overwhelm reason, when too many new opposites complicate the problem? For example, when Party A and Party B get on the bus, it is agreed in advance that Party A will buy tickets. Who knows that A habitually only bought one ticket. The conductor came to B and asked B to buy a ticket. B thought the conductor made a mistake because there were too many people, and said, didn't A buy it? The conductor said: No? B is a little unbelievable: didn't you agree that he would buy it? The conductor was angry: Who do you think you are? People have to buy tickets when they take the bus! ? Hearing the quarrel, A quickly said:? B, I forgot to buy it. ? B heard that he was about to pay for the ticket, and the conductor said, You can't do anything now, can you? Isn't it a dollar? Escape from what? ? The two sides quarreled at once. In this debate, the initial objection was whether to buy tickets. Just as the objection softened, when B was preparing to buy a ticket, the conductor did not withdraw from the debate at the right time, but introduced a new objection: whether B wanted to evade the ticket. The argument got out of hand.
3. Find alternative arguments. Sun Tzu's Art of War says:? The soldiers who defeat others without fighting are also above them. ? The best way to argue in daily life is to defeat the enemy without arguing. It is not necessary to soften the opposition through argument, and sometimes we can find ways of argument other than argument. One is to find a third party to solve it. For example, in the above example, if the conductor finds A (the third party) in the debate, A will make up the ticket for B, and the opposition will soften. The second is to try to make the other party forget the opposition, or make the other party feel that the opposition is not important. For example, when a mother comes home and finds that her son has made a mess at home, she grabs her son. Do you want to be beaten? The only son plunged into his mother's arms and said angrily: Mom, I love you. Mom sighed: Oh, forget it. Don't do this again. ? My son jumped up when he heard this. Yes, sir! ? Mom:? There's nothing I can do for you. ? The opposition of this debate (strictly speaking, it has not yet formed) is whether the son's' mistake' should be punished. A clever son softens each other in a child's unique way, making his mother feel that opposition is not important, but the love between mother and child is important. In this respect, adults who have been trained in logic are far from being children's opponents.
Second,? Does all this make sense? intelligence
The psychology of the argument is: our side? Always makes sense? , the other party? No reason? , push each other? Irrational? Hutong is a great victory. The daily debate does not pursue the sharp opposition between rationality and irrationality, but softens the opposition. So, is it necessary for both sides? Does all this make sense? Psychologically, looking for each other? Is it reasonable? Composition. Otherwise, the opposition will be hard to soften. For example:
The husband and wife who are about to give birth are arguing over whether to buy a computer or an air conditioner. Husband:? It is good to buy a computer. If you buy a computer, you can write articles, work and surf the Internet. What's the use? Might as well buy an air conditioner. I bought an air conditioner. Not afraid of heat in summer, not afraid of husband in winter: not afraid of heat without buying air conditioners. My wife:? I what me? Who always turns on the electric fan in summer? He also said that he was not afraid of the heat! ? Husband:? Anyway, I want to buy a computer. ? Wife:? I just want to buy an air conditioner.
The two sides don't give in to each other, interrupt each other's words, and don't want to admit that each other's words are reasonable. At this rate, there will be no good result. In fact, as long as more consideration is given to each other, the husband may advocate buying a computer, which is convenient for working at home and taking care of his wife during labor and postpartum; And the wife advocates buying air conditioners for postpartum comfort? In this way, there is no real opposition under the surface opposition, and the opposition naturally softens.
Third,? Equality? intelligence
Debate needs to establish superior psychology, first of all, overwhelm the other side in momentum, so we often use parallelism, continuous questioning, continuous questioning and other means to enhance momentum, hoping that the other side will be dumbfounded by our momentum. Daily arguments are generally not like this, because we have to admit? Does all this make sense? Both sides should work together to soften the opposition, so everyone is equal. Only by making the other person feel equal, rather than being overwhelmed by you, can he soften the opposition with you. Otherwise, it will be counterproductive. For example, the old lady quarreled over trivial matters and asked her daughter-in-law to go back to her family. When the director's wife came home, she severely reprimanded the old lady. The old lady refused and said a few words. The old director immediately asked like a barrage: Why do you bother her (daughter-in-law) to go back to her parents' house? Why not pay attention to the influence and make the house dirty? What happened to the daughter-in-law What's the matter? What did you say when your son came home? Who would cook such a delicious meal? Who will pick up the grandson who comes home from school? You always love to seniority! ? The old lady cried aggrieved: how can I live if you abandon me? ? The initial objection to this debate is: Is the old lady wrong, because the old director didn't consider it? Equality? Psychologically, the overbearing reprimand of his wife, her wife can't figure it out, is also expected.
Don't argue, don't argue (? Not arguing? Psychological), the second is not just to defend yourself (? Does all this make sense? Psychological), the third is not to let the other side argue under the condition of inequality (? Equality? Psychological). Having achieved the above three points, we can say that we have reached the ideal state of daily debate.
;