Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

The American GeniusThe American Genius

Opinion Editorials

Six rules for effectively arguing any opposing point

Online or offline, humans are programmed to be thoughtful, but not necessarily logical. Remembering six simple rules for arguing can do wonders for discussing any topic with someone whose viewpoint opposes your own, be it a client, a coworker, or an online commenter.

The rules for arguing

We’ve all created embarrassment for ourselves by parading our ignorance in public. Most of the time we’re convinced the problem resided in the other side’s inability to see the logic in our position. How many times have we realized the error in our logic after we’ve taken positions basically declaring gravity is a myth? This is me raising my hand in shame. Done it — many times. Merely recalling a few of ’em can make me blush a bit.

One of my OldSchool mentors tired of me arguing meritless points, so he laid down a brief set of rules.

  • Answering the other side’s question with a question isn’t allowed — ever.
  • Your answer may challenge the question’s premise, if you believe it’s false.
  • If answering, you must only address the question asked, nothing else. 
  • Label opinion as opinion, not disguised as fact. Otherwise, be as empirical as you can.
  • Never, as in never ever, get personal. You not only show the world your position is weak, you also demonstrate a lack of emotional maturity.
  • If in your judgment, the other side proves its case, smile, you learned something.
As an aside — ever notice those who’d rather argue the earth is flat than learn that we’ve known otherwise for hundreds of years?

Those rules have been a gold mine for me on a few levels. They’re especially valuable when you don’t understand the other side’s logic. I’ve learned to first assume it’s my logic at fault. As a young man, if I didn’t understand their logic, the default was, ‘they’re illogical’, which is silly on its face. Admitting I didn’t understand and asking for clarification works wonders. Duh. Solid questions will either teach you something you didn’t know, or help you undress their logic. Either way, you make progress towards a better understanding of the subject matter. Once I accepted the value of learning I might be incorrect, debating (discussing?) became the conduit to many of those ‘teaching moments’. Learning something new, especially when it simultaneously cures your own ignorance, is what fuels our growth.

A real life example of the rules in action

I was a very involved youth baseball coach when my son was growing up. One day after practice, one of the dads mentioned that Cecil Fielder, a Detroit Tiger, had just inked a huge multi-million, multi-year contract. Some of the kids, knowing this new contract would pay Fielder far more than their local hero and future first ballot Hall of Famer Tony Gwynn, were enraged. I embraced the opportunity for a teaching moment.

First, I went over the above rules, to which they agreed, even though many were rollin’ their eyes. I allowed myself the first question.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Me: “Why shouldn’t Fielder get a far higher salary than Tony?”

Them: “Cuz Tony’s batting average is literally more than 100 points higher than Fielder’s!”

Me: “If that’s so, why did the Tigers decide to give him so much more money than Tony?”

Many at this point were sensing a trap, much to their credit. You could see it on their screwed up facial expressions. After all, the owners of a MLB team must be smart, right?

Them: “Don’t know cuz it makes no sense. It’s stoopid. Why did they?!”

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Me: “I don’t know for sure, but logic tells me it’s due to the fact he hits so many homers, and knocks in so many runs every year. He knocks in over 100 runs every year.

What do you think the Tigers value more, total runs scored — OR — total number of singles hit?”

Them: “But Tony’s hittin’ over .350!”

Me: “Answer the question.”

Them: “Total runs scored?” (Dripping with teenage sarcasm.)

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Me: “Let me come from another direction. How do we know who wins a baseball game?”

Them: “The one with the most runs.”

Lights go on above a buncha teenage heads. What they learned was that yes, .350 hitters are worth a bunch, but those who produce what, you know, wins games? They get paid a BUNCH.

Using the rules in my industry

Using those rules is how I learned what works better in real estate as a brokerage. My initial belief, set in stone, was that those representing nothing but buyers were kings of the real estate road. Then I had The Conversation (calling it a debate would have insulted debaters everywhere).

Though agents specializing in buyer representation can and do earn impressive incomes, listing agents who also take care of buyers do much mo betta. I had to learn this from someone packin’ over a decade as a broker who also happened to own the biggest listing brokerage in town. When I learned the facts, it became painfully obvious I had come to the table clueless in real estate land. It also showed me I was unnecessarily limiting my earning potential. It’s one thing to opt in for a lower income with full knowledge.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

It’s quite another to leave money on the table due to ignorance, or worse, cuz you’re somehow emotionally committed to conclusions which are fantasy based.

If I hadn’t been forced into adhering to the aforementioned rules, my emotional, opinion driven attachment to an erroneous belief would’ve remained intact. I would’ve been plowing fields guaranteed to deliver smaller harvests than other available fields.

In business this approach has saved me countless times. We all believe in what we’re convinced are axiomatic principles. We’ve also learned from time to time that some of those beliefs were proven false, by evidence about which we were ignorant.

I propose a new way forward

Finally, how many times have we allowed ourselves to ignore mountains of evidence disproving something we knew was true? How many times have we seen folks personally attack someone simply because their position has been undermined by incontrovertible, documented evidence? When we do that it, not only does it reflect poorly on us, it’s prima facie evidence that we’re outa ammo.

It’s alright to say, “I was wrong, thanks.” Or, “I didn’t realize that was the case.”

Let’s argue our various cases, but in a way allowing both sides, if at all possible, to part ways knowing the truth. Being wrong about something isn’t a big deal. Defending that wrong position in the face of empirical evidence to the contrary makes us dumber than dirt.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Let’s stop doin’ that, OK?

Written By

Jeff Brown specializes in real estate investment for retirement, has practiced real estate for over 40 years and is a veteran of over 200 tax deferred exchanges, many multi-state. Brown is a second generation broker and works daily with the third generation. With CCIM training and decades of hands on experience, Brown's expertise is highly sought after, some of which he shares on his real estate investing blog.

4 Comments

4 Comments

  1. JensThomason

    May 24, 2012 at 7:44 am

    Really good article, Interesting and useful, apart from this I am an engineer & yesterday I was reading an article about <a href=”https://jasonhalek.datanetgroup.com”> Jason Halek  </a> . I really feel to share with you guys. I read about him. He was only 10 years old when he started working small jobs in his community and then he started business of soft drink and now he is the successful business man. He owns several oil and gas production companies. Jason Halek is not only the successful business man but also a philanthropist. He established Halek Charities & nonprofit organization dedicated to providing assistance to various humanitarian causes. I really got inspired by him.
     

  2. gregcook01

    May 25, 2012 at 8:33 am

    Jeff, the first rule of arguing: Never argue with idiots, from a distance no one can tell the difference

  3. Ro4RealEstate

    May 26, 2012 at 10:14 am

    Very well written piece, Jeff.  I enjoyed it and will share.

  4. Frugyl

    June 4, 2012 at 8:05 am

    That’s debatable! Ha ha! 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

The
American Genius
news neatly in your inbox

Subscribe to our mailing list for news sent straight to your email inbox.

Advertisement

KEEP READING!

Opinion Editorials

Quiet quitting is a phrase spreading like wildfire and it is already contentious and misunderstood. Let's discuss.

Business Entrepreneur

(ENTREPRENEUR) You and your business partner(s) are in a close relationship, and just like a marriage, negative emotions may play a role in the...

Business News

(BUSINESS) Having a mentor in business can improve your chances of success, and for some less obvious reasons than you may expect.

Opinion Editorials

(EDITORIAL) America runs on Dunkin'? More like America runs on burn out and caffeine for steam. We all need to get over being busy,...

The American Genius is a strong news voice in the entrepreneur and tech world, offering meaningful, concise insight into emerging technologies, the digital economy, best practices, and a shifting business culture. We refuse to publish fluff, and our readers rely on us for inspiring action. Copyright © 2005-2022, The American Genius, LLC.