What’s the point of winning an argument, anyway? An argument, usually, is not a war between countries, where if you win a complete and utter victory, you can force the people you conquered to do what you want them to. In fact, such victories are rare and illusory. We may have won the war in Iraq, but we were losing the peace for a while. It was not until we made friends, that we started to get anywhere.
If winning an argument is pretty much useless, why do we argue? Well, some argue for the sport of it. Some argue to vent feelings. Some argue because they lose control. Some argue because they don’t know any other way.
Non-sport arguments are pretty much the giving up stage of dispute resolution. When you’ve tried talking and talking and negotiating and negotiating, and you can’t reach a solution all the parties will agree to, that’s when the arguing breaks out. At that point, you are no longer negotiating. You are just trying to force the other person to your will. The real giving up stage, of course, is physical fighting.
So how do we resolve disputes? Well, as @pdworkin pointed out, listening really helps. If you can’t listen naturally, then use a talking stick to enforce the principle. Everyone gets a turn, and everyone can talk as long as they want. Have you ever been to a Quaker convention? Their rule is there is no resolution until everyone has reached “consensus.” It takes a while.
Well, your personal dispute resolving can take a while, too. The temptation to give up and argue or fight can be enormous. But those techniques get you no where other than feeling bad about the other person or yourself. It’s about not liking the person(s) you are negotiating with. It’s about destroying relationships, in the long run—if there are never any resolutions or apologies.
The thing is, you can try to enforce your will on someone else, and they might even agree, verbally. But they’ll still obstruct you every step of the way—sometimes overtly, often covertly. You want an agreement, because that’s the only thing that works. That’s the only thing all parties will want to carry through on. Anything short of unforced agreement leads to passive-aggressive behavior at best, and full break down of relations at worst.
The above is all about serious arguments. It applies to individuals and nations and labor negotiations. What this is not about is sporting arguments. These are arguments where you either have a formal debate, or it’s an alpha dog kind of thing at a party or meeting.
Other people have pointed out that information is useful in these arguments. If you enjoy that kind of thing, more power to you. I have learned over my life that it’s a waste of my time.
What I prefer is listening. You can see it in the way I ask my questions. I don’t ask for advice (although people love to give it), and I don’t ask for normative positions. What I ask for is stories. What is your (read individual) experience with this or that or the other thing. I really don’t give a shit what anyone tells me I should do. I care greatly about your real life experience with something.
My approach in many of these debate questions, such as political or religious discussions, is to ignore them. If I do want to participate, I have found that asking my partners in discussion how they got to this point of view—what life experiences brought them to this point. I have found this usually brings out some very interesting stories, and that I can truly understand where a person is coming from. It also helps me to suggest alternative ways of interpreting their lives and alternative means of achieving the goals they have, which usually are the same ones I have.
Arguing is useless for dispute resolution. What we should be doing is finding points of commonality. That way we can feel like we are on the same side, and we will get to a resolution much more quickly.
I’m a great fan of the “talking stick” principle. Everyone gets to talk for as long as they want, and they get listened to—really listened to—by everyone else. It is hard to learn to listen, because most of us have these scripts running in our heads. We are thinking what we will say next, and in doing so, we miss what our friend is telling us. Friend is another Quaker term. We are all friends. It is helpful to think this way, although difficult.
So you listen completely to others, never thinking about what you will say until when it is your turn, and then you say whatever is on your mind at that time. It is sufficient. It works. It usually doesn’t cause the bad feelings and anger that arguing causes. It keeps your blood pressure down. It lengthens your life. What’s not to like?
Composing members:
0
