Argument and the Internet Part Deux
The first part of this article was an attempt by me to convince you that arguing on the internet is perhaps the second most useless thing ever(Beaten only by pet clothing, why do we do that to animals?!). But if you have managed your way through to this one, then you like me just love being on the internet. Let’s accept it, it is perhaps the most beautiful place there is. Where else could something like http://tinysubversions.com/ or http://www.theuselessweb.com/ exist? For all its quirkiness and pleasant surprises, it does have its share of nastiness. And like I mentioned, quite a bit of that lies in the comments sections of posts, photos, videos, and blogs. Debate flourishes, perhaps not always in the right direction, but you definitely can see quite a bit of it. So what do you do if you want to engage in discussion and put across your thoughts? How does one drive their point across a wall of stubbornness and survive a sea of retorts most of which just say “noob”?
The first step would identify the purpose of your argument. A lot of discussions online go in circles because people get into it without really thinking what they are getting out of it. We argue to achieve at least one of three major objectives and identifying which one could help you approach the problem a lot better. Our aim is to usually persuade, justify or explain. Or sometimes it is just to annoy others, in which case you’re already doing it wrong *rolls eyes*. If your aim is to change the behavior or an opinion of the person(s) you’re conversing with, you’re trying to persuade. If you’re providing reasons to believe in something or reasons as to why you believe something, you’re justifying. And finally, if the aim is to provide more information to further understanding, then you’d want to be explaining. This differs from the first two in the sense that explanation requires the conclusion drawn to already be true. The first step of any argument would be to figure which of these is your end goal. Which of these are you trying to do? Different strategies work with best for each. For example, in the cases of justifications, selling the argument on one’s character or person works best whereas if you’re explaining, the best tool to use is logic and reasoning (To be honest, logic and reasoning are the best tools for any argument but unfortunately they don’t always work well with humans)
But when do I know that I’m done arguing? What does the sweet taste of success look like? Are arguments done when I am done convincing the other person? Ideally yes, but if we set that as our target, then we’d see ourselves consistently fall short. That’s because sometimes you can have wonderful logic filled with true statements and still not be able to get your idea across. Human beings are not always perfectly rational and biases can behave as roadblocks. In these cases, you would have failed to persuade, but you could rejoice in the fact that you have succeeded in justifying your beliefs. You can’t always have it your way (Or more realistically you won’t have it your way 96% of the time).
As much as it hurts me to say it, debates on the internet are less about reasoning but more about the ability to use rhetoric. Your ability to use language severely outweighs what you say and one has to accept that it does make sense (Notice what I do here, we will talk about that in a bit). The internet is an informal setting where the burden lies on you to make others understand what you say and not on them to be convinced by you. I could tell you that Kantian Ethics demands you to not to steal as you should Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. Or I could tell you “Don’t steal man. Would you like it if someone stole from you?”. The idea behind this is to not try and sound smart online but sound likable. That goes a lot further.
There is though one particular strategy or technique, call it whatever you want that I notice works fantastic(or at least better than anything else) while arguing in both life and especially on web forums and discussion. Ever heard of the quotes “You might have won the battle, but you will lose the war!”. Apart from being a fantastic battlecry for a losing side, the statement holds a nugget of wisdom in it. People often are so intent on winning discussions that they never take a step back, leave alone aim for a zero-sum game. Concessions, to me, are perhaps the best tool that furthers one’s cause. We concede in all our arguments without ever thinking about it. When a salesman closes his/her deal with you after providing a discount, that person has won through conceding. Taking that one step back in their profits has helped them make the sale. When you try to go out and of course your parents don’t want you to, you tell them you’ll be back an hour earlier than usual. Well, that is a concession. And even if it does not help it does not make it worse for you.
Conceding does a lot to help you convince others. For starters, with the internet being filled with hate fuelled stubbornness, a person who is open to accept that there maybe things they are wrong about is a breath of fresh air. People are more likely to see your viewpoint if you are willing to see theirs. Like I mentioned before, character or Ethos, plays a huge role in arguing and conceding does a lot to help that cause. By being open to the fact that the other person maybe right, you acknowledge what they have to say and make the person feel they are not talking to a brick wall. Also, a little niceness never hurt anyone!
Improv actors tell you, that to build on scenes they have one major rule. Never say the word “No”. Do not reject an idea or dismiss the possibility of something because you believe your opinion on it is better. By adopting this rule, every retort you have could never come from a point of malice but rather from the desire to work towards an ideal middle ground. In my opinion, the best negotiators are those who know when to give in. And it is very difficult to rebut the fact that this would be extremely effective.
The final reason why one should always be open to conceding is simply the fact that you could be wrong. As plain as that. Our opinions are formed through the tiny echo chambers that we live in. Give the same news article to two different people and they will draw different conclusions from it. Just because we are sure about something does nothing to show that we are right about it. It is a fantastic feeling when you go into a discussion with the mindset that there is every possibility that you could be wrong about everything because then there is no losing, only learning!
