Tips to beat your opponent in discussions

[afandiel]

Hey people!

It has been long since I last posted a topic.

It is crucial to master certain skills in debating in order to win the debate.

I want to share some of my observations in this board as to the techniques often utilised by the visitors of the board in delivering their opinions. I find them usuful myself.

1. Always create an image that you have a full knowledge as to the subject matter. Do not hesitate to use any facts derived from different sources to sound confident and objective.

2. Try to direct the flow of discussion in a certain way, so that opponents could come to the same conclusion as yours (so that they think it is their own point of view).

3. Never exploit rude expressions and personal remarks, never respond to defamatory statements. If you do respond then avoid any negative statements (swear words).

4. do not address any person directly try to do so impliedly.

5. Never start argument if your are not sure to win. Don't let your opponent to take advantage of your weak points (of course you don't show your weak points in the first place)

6. The message designed to convey your goal should always come at the end of the topic you start, that is the beginning of the topic would comprise background, general info, the main body would reflect different aspects. and the final part the purpose.

7. You may wish to disrepute your opponent, then make him/her look like stupid, mentally impaired, distressed, angry or unreasonable. It is quite useful as people wouldn't take your opponent's views seriously.

Any comments or suggestions.

Please, note that these tips could serve useful in cases where the truth is relative or subjective, i.e, if you are stonger in arguing then the truth is with you.

I would be delighted if you could share with me your own observations

respectfully

[OPTIMIST']

Do you follow these tips??

[Javanmard]

very impressive and very accurate.....all the points were well put...

[Zanuda]

Very clever, but cynical!

So does this mean then whoever uses the above-mentioned skills has huge advantage over his opponents even if he is wrong?

The thing is: some of the "tips" you've mentioned are in fact conventional rules to conduct any civilised debate and arguement. They provide logic, fairness and sensibility of a discussion.
============================
I na koy fig tebe nujno bilo ustraivat' zdes' "striptiz"?
Ya znayu otkuda ti znayesh vse eti "tips" :)
- Hehe, potomu chto sam takoy. ;)

Take it easy

[Zanuda]

Now serioulsy: What you wrote Afandi does not mean that everyone does so or should do so, but bear in mind that the opponent might do so.

I personally don't like half of them, even though I agree that some people use them. I think truth should be more important then winning a debate.

I conclude from what u said that some people here argue for the sake of winning rather than for the sake of finding the truth. And this group in fact abuse the "tips" you've listed.

Ideally, v spore rojdayetsya istina, but we do not live in an ideal world (unfortunately).

[Zanuda]

That was a critical view, not a criticising one.

[mustafa]

Nu, imagemakers, nachitalis etogo ,kak tam Karnegi chto li?

[afandiel]

True,
many tips are indeed cynical.

But bear in mind, the discussion does not always follow rules morality and ethics.

the success depends on how you use them, they can never guarantee a 100% success, after all as you said yourself your opponent may well be aware of them.

Of course some of them are conventional rules, I did not "invent" anything new, they only reflect my obserevations.

then you posted another message staring off by saying "Now Seriosly" or smth like that.

should I ignore the first of your postings as they do not represent anything substancial?

these tips cannot be observed, in my view, in areas where there is only one "truth" usually natural sciences, i.e. you cannot possibly dispute as to the gravitation theory as it is scientifically proven.
to be continued later

[Zanuda]

Afandi, I know that what you've listed is positive (ie., it's an existing fact).
I only tried to look at it from the normative (critical) perspective.

Anyway, your list is indeed veru useful in that it shows that some people abuse the tools to win a debate.

[email]

:)