What are the rudimentary techniques for constructive discussions?
When discussing something, it may be difficult for both parties to convince each other, such as when the claims conflict with each other and no conclusion can be reached, or when one pushes the claim without hearing an opinion. Entrepreneur Liam Rosen explains techniques for convincing each other and conducting constructive discussions, even for beginners who are not accustomed to logical discussions.
Beginner's Guide to Arguing Constructively
◆ Three principles
'The true debate is built on cooperation. Both sides need to think'why they're wrong'and sometimes bend their beliefs,' Rosen said in a constructive debate. Lists three principles for.
1: Admit your mistake
In the discussion, it is possible that 'I believed in something deeply, but gradually realized that I was wrong', so on the premise that 'I may be wrong' Rosen proposes to engage in discussions. 'If you succeed in admitting that you are wrong, you have to be willing to change your mind. The humility of admitting that you have changed your mind is the most honor in a sincere discussion. It's one way of thinking, 'says Rosen.
2: Do not make unnecessary criticism
'If the other party's claim is different from yours and you think the other party's claim is correct, don't be afraid to agree with it. And if the other party's claim is unreasonable, your claim is correct. Don't unnecessarily emphasize, 'Rosen commented. On the contrary, Rosen points out that unnecessary support and excessive praise should not be made.
Rosen also said that one opinion should not be used to judge the good or bad of the person being discussed. In other words, it is important not to misunderstand that one is denied by the other party as 'all are denied', but to be prepared to engage in discussions on the premise that if one is denied, 'others are affirmed'. And that.
3: There are always people who disagree
Taking 'Star Wars' as an example, Rosen said, 'In the discussion, most people think that they are'Knights of the Jedi'and are fighting for all the good in the universe. But for any Jedi knight, there appears to be a Sith-like entity claiming that 'The Jedi are wrong and the dark side is good.' Keep in mind that this Sith may be himself. Must be inscribed in. '
Rosen points out that the perspective that 'some people think that an idea that seems bad to them is good' is important in the discussion, because I am not completely good and the other party is not completely evil. .. In addition, the goal of the discussion is not 'to defeat evil' but 'to reveal the truth', and Rosen explains the importance of always thinking about different perspectives when approaching the discussion.
◆ Rebuilding the head
Rosen says that in order to have a constructive discussion, you must first take the time to rebuild your entire head. Reconstruction of the head refers to the recognition and avoidance of 'cognitive bias' and 'logical error'.
According to Rosen, 'the limits and mistakes of human judgment that prevent people from acting rationally' are called cognitive bias. Cognitive bias is present in all aspects of human life, and in tense situations such as controversy, cognitive bias tends to appear more frequently as emotions rise and the brain becomes overloaded.
Rosen says that logical mistakes are mistakes that uselessly turn indisputable points into discussions, which are unintentionally caused by cognitive bias, carelessness, and ignorance. Logical mistakes include discussion dilemmas and disagreements.
Recognizing that there are two things, 'cognitive bias' and 'logical error', both for you and the other person in the discussion, and going around to avoid them as much as possible makes the discussion smooth and constructive.
◆ Discussion strategy
Rosen cites six strategies to make the discussion as constructive as possible.
1: Probability allocation
When discussing a subject that no one believes 100% or is uncertain, an effective strategy is to tell the other person exactly how strongly you believe in the subject. As an example, Rosen cites the theme, 'Can teachers be armed to reduce gun violence in schools?' If you disagree with this theme 100%, then 'arming teachers is gun violence in schools.' I think there is a 70% chance of reducing the number of people who disagree. '
2: Conditions for withdrawal of opinion
To keep the discussion going smoothly, it is also necessary to find a workaround when the discussion falls into parallel lines. For example, if a person named A argues that 'an apple grows on a tree' and a person named B argues that 'an apple does not grow on a tree', the discussions can fall into parallel lines if each other's claims become one point.
So, A says, 'If you look at trees all over the world and find that apples aren't growing, I change your mind.' B says, 'If you find even one tree that actually has apples, think about it. By proposing a method of avoiding parallel lines by clearly stating 'what facts should be proved to withdraw the claim' in advance, such as 'change', the discussion can proceed smoothly.
3: Reconfirmation of opinion
It is also important to reconfirm whether the opinions are understood correctly by having the other party express the opinions expressed in the discussion or by expressing the other party's opinions. By doing so, you can not only make sure that you are listening to your opinions, but also clarify your thoughts.
4: Give room to withdraw
'In discussions, no one wants to lose mens and giving no one the option to easily withdraw from the discussion can lead to terrible consequences,' Rosen said. As an easy way to give the other person room to withdraw, Rosen said, 'Remember to be polite in the discussion and treat the other person with respect, no matter how wrong you think or disagree. That's it. '
5: Separate emotions and discussions
Emotions have a big impact on discussions, but 'discussing in good faith does not mean being completely rational without feelings,' Rosen said. Instead of excluding emotions, it is necessary to reflect on the fact that emotions may influence one's opinion and do the best to maintain objectivity. Rosen also said that it is equally valuable to look at the emotions of the other person in discussion and how they affect the claim.
6: Extraction of opinions
When the other party asserts his / her dissenting opinion, instead of denying everything, listen to the other party's claim and extract the most rational content, and does the content make sense until both parties reach an agreement? Rosen cites the technique of ascertaining and using it as a source of discussion. In addition, if no agreement is reached, the discussion will be reconstructed after adjusting the ambiguous content to the understanding of the other party.
'We are programmed to ignore all disagreements, so this technique can be difficult for beginners, but it can be improved by practicing it,' Rosen said. It was.
As a training to extract the opinions of the other person, Mr. Rosen said, 'Take time to listen to the other person's discussion and think critically about what the person is saying.' 'Not only the other person's words, but also the background and beliefs, 'Think about understanding the problem' and 'organize the interpretation of the argument in your mind while sorting the opinions of the other party from the most rational to the most irrational.'
Rosen said, 'The guide is summarized in one line:'Discussion is the cooperation of two people to find the truth.' Even if you forget the detailed beliefs and strategies that this guide provides, you can give a given discussion. As long as you treat it as 'collaboration for the truth,' you won't make a mistake. To claim more effectively, you need to separate yourself from the traditional idea of victory. If you want to declare victory, You should discuss in good faith and win when the other person opens your heart. '
Related Posts:
in Note, Posted by darkhorse_log