Thank You for Arguing Audiobook | Chapters 1-4

Summary

この動画は、説得力のある議論の技術について詳しく解説しています。論理的な議論の仕方、相手の感情を理解し共感することの重要性、そして信頼できる人格を持つことで、聴衆を自分の意見に傾けるための三つの基本的な手段を紹介しています。議論の目的を明確にし、過去・現在・未来のテンスを使い分け、相手の論点に同意することで効果的に議論を進めるコツも教えてくれます。議論を通して人々を説得し、自分の意図した行動を取らせるための実践的なテクニックが数多く紹介されており、説得力のある議論の技術を身につけたい人にとって非常に有益な内容となっています。

Takeaways

• 😄 効果的な議論には、論理、感情、人格性の3つの要素が必要不可欠である。
• 🧠 相手の論理を認めることで、議論を有利に展開できる。
• 🤗 相手の感情に共感し、気分を変えることが説得力を高める。
• 😎 信頼できる人格性を持つことで、聴衆から信用される。
• 🔮 議論の焦点を未来の選択肢に置くことで、建設的な決定につながる。
• 👂 聴衆の気持ちに寄り添うことで、議論を争いから対話へと変えられる。
• 🎭 修辞的な技巧を使うことで、聴衆を自分の意のままに動かせる。
• 🧘‍♀️ 相手の論点を認めつつ、自分の主張へと誘導することが重要。
• 🌱 議論の核心は、過去の非難ではなく、未来の選択肢である。
• 🌟 適切な修辞と技巧を使えば、誰とでも建設的な議論ができる。

Q & A

説得術の3つの基本的なツールとは何ですか?

説得術の3つの基本的なツールは、ロゴス(論理による説得)、エトス(人格による説得)、パトス(感情による説得)です。

ロゴス(論理による説得)の最も重要な戦術は何ですか?

ロゴスの最も重要な戦術は譲歩です。相手の議論を自分の利益に活用することです。

パトス(感情による説得)の最も重要な戦術は何ですか?

パトスの最も重要な戦術は共感です。聴衆の感情に共鳴し、その後自分の主張に合わせて聴衆の気分を変えることです。

エトス(人格による説得)で最も重要なことは何ですか?

エトスで最も重要なことは品位ある態度を保つことです。 これについては次の章で詳しく説明されています。

アリストテレスは説得術をどのように分類していましたか?

アリストテレスは、過去を扱う法廷弁論術、現在を扱う儀式弁論術、未来を扱う審議弁論術の3つに分類していました。

説得においてテンスの制御が重要な理由は何ですか?

テンスの制御が重要なのは、聴衆に選択させるためには未来形が最適だからです。過去形は非難につながり、現在形は価値観の対立になりがちです。

説得において、ターゲットの設定が重要な理由は何ですか?

説得における目標設定が重要なのは、聴衆の気分、考え方、行動を変えたいかによって、戦術を変える必要があるからです。

説得における譲歩の利点は何ですか?

譲歩は、相手の議論の一部を受け入れ、怒りを取り除き、対立から議論へと場を変えることができます。相手の頭の中に入り込む機会も得られます。

子供に説得されたエピソードから、何を学ぶことができますか?

子供でさえ無意識のうちに論理、感情、人格による説得の要素を使っていたことから、説得は本能的なものであり、誰もが説得の技術を学ぶ価値があることがわかります。

説得の最終目標は何でしょうか?

説得の最終目標は、聴衆に自分の選択を望ませ、行動に移させることです。単なる同意ではなく、コンセンサス(合意)を得ることが重要です。

Outlines

00:00

😀 感動的な議論の力

この段落では、著者が息子と短パンを履くかどうかについて議論する様子が描かれています。著者は修辞学の手法を用いて説得を試みますが、最終的には息子に折れてしまいました。修辞学の三大手段である論理(ロゴス)、感情(パトス)、人格(エトス)の重要性が示唆されています。著者は息子の議論を真剣に受け止め、設得力のある議論をすることで、説得の技術を子供に伝えようとしていました。

05:01

😮 説得の極意は同意すること

この段落では、同意することが説得の要諦であることが説かれています。著者は上司との議論の経験から、相手の意見に同意し、自分の意見を押し付けないことで、相手を説得できることを学びました。インプロビゼーションの「Yes, and...」の発想も同様で、相手の発言を受け入れつつ、自分の意向に誘導することができます。同意することで争いを回避し、親しみやすい雰囲気を作り出せるため、説得力が増すのです。

10:01

🤗 感情に訴えかける説得の技術

この段落は、聴衆の感情に訴えかける方法について述べています。聴衆の気分や感情を共感的に受け止め、自分の立場に引き付けることが重要です。サン・オーガスティヌスは、聴衆を泣かせることで説得力を高めていたそうです。状況に応じて聴衆の気分を変化させる技術が必要不可欠で、それによって聴衆が行動を起こしてくれるようになります。また、聴衆が望む結果につながるよう、説得の焦点をうまく当てることも大切です。

15:03

✋ 議論の目的を明確にする

この段落では、議論の目的を明確にすることの重要性が説かれています。目的は聴衆の気分を変えるか、考え方を変えるか、行動を促すかの3つに分類できます。状況に応じて適切な目的を設定し、それに沿って議論を進めることが成功のカギとなります。過去の出来事については非難の議論に、現在の価値観については称賛や非難の議論に、将来の選択については利益を最大化する議論に焦点を当てるべきです。議論の舵取りを誤ると、目的から外れて迷走してしまいます。

20:03

⌚ 議論の時制を使いわける

この段落は、議論において適切な時制を使うことの重要性を説いています。過去の出来事については過去形、現在の価値観については現在形、将来の選択については未来形を使うべきです。アリストテレスはそれぞれの時制に修辞の形式を対応させており、将来形の議論が最も建設的だと考えていました。未来形の議論は聴衆に選択の機会を与え、合意形成を促進するためです。一方、過去形や現在形の議論は非難や価値観の押し付けになりがちで、対立を生みやすくなります。

25:05

😎 聴衆を説得する準備作戦

この段落では、聴衆を説得する前の準備作戦について説明されています。最初に目的を明確にする必要があります。聴衆の気分を変えるのか、考え方を変えるのか、行動を促すのかを決めます。次に議論の核心を定めます。過去の出来事についての非難なのか、現在の価値観についてなのか、将来の選択なのかを特定します。そして適切な時制を選び、聴衆に合わせて論理的に議論を展開します。議論の舵取りを誤ると迷走してしまうので、目的と核心、時制をしっかりと意識することが大切です。

30:07

🔍 議論の本質を見抜く

この段落では、議論の本質を見抜くための3つのポイントが示されています。第一に、議論の核心が過去の責任追及なのか、現在の価値観なのか、未来の選択なのかを見極める必要があります。第二に、議論の時制が過去形なのか現在形なのか未来形なのかを意識する必要があります。第三に、事実関係についての議論なのか、推測に基づく議論なのかを区別する必要があります。適切に核心を捉え、時制を使い分け、事実と推測を明確に区別することで、議論が生産的になり、合意形成へとつながります。

35:07

🧐 上手な議論のコツ

この段落では、上手な議論のためのコツが解説されています。議論は常に未来志向でなければなりません。過去の非難合戦に陥ると生産的な議論にはなりません。未来形を使うことで、選択の機会を与え、合意形成を促進できます。また事実関係よりも推測に基づく議論のほうが建設的です。一方的な押し付けではなく、聴衆の意見を汲み取りながら、最善の選択肢を一緒に探ることが大切です。柔軟な姿勢と、双方の利益を考慮することが、上手な議論には不可欠です。

40:08

🎯 議論の的を得る方法

この段落は、議論で的を得るためのポイントについて述べています。まず目的を明確にすることが重要で、聴衆の気分を変えるのか、考え方を変えるのか、行動を促すのかを決めます。次に議論の核心が過去の責任追及なのか現在の価値観なのか未来の選択なのかを特定し、それに合わせて適切な時制を使います。そして事実よりも推測に基づいた議論を展開することで、より建設的な結論を導き出せます。常に未来志向で、聴衆の意見を取り入れながら、最善の選択肢を一緒に見つけていく姿勢が大切です。

45:10

🔋 聴衆の気持ちをくみ取る

この段落は、聴衆の気持ちをくみ取ることの重要性について説いています。議論を始める前に、聴衆がどのような気分なのかを理解し、それに合わせて自分の立場や論理、感情を調整する必要があります。聴衆と同じ感情を共有し、相手の気持ちに寄り添うことで信頼関係が構築でき、説得力が増します。一方的な押し付けではなく、相手の立場に立って考え、共感することが大切です。議論は勝ち負けではなく、双方が満足できる合意形成を目指す必要があります。

50:12

🎭 説得の三大要素

この段落では、説得の三大要素である論理(ロゴス)、感情(パトス)、人格(エトス)について解説されています。論理とは、聴衆の合理性に訴えかける技術です。感情とは、聴衆の気分に働きかける技術です。人格とは、説得者自身の信頼性や魅力に訴えかける技術です。これら3つの要素を適切に組み合わせることで、高い説得力を発揮できます。また、同意や共感、譲歩といった具体的な手法を使うことで、聴衆をうまく自分の意向に誘導できるようになります。

55:13

🧠 理論と実践を両立させる

この段落は、修辞学の理論と実践的な技術を組み合わせる重要性を強調しています。説得の基本的な理論として、論理(ロゴス)、感情(パトス)、人格(エトス)の3つの要素があり、これらを上手く活用することが重要です。同時に、具体的な技術としての同意、共感、譲歩なども活用する必要があります。理論だけでは不十分で、実践に基づく経験からも多くのことを学ばなければなりません。理論と実践を適切に組み合わせることで、より高い説得力を身につけることができるのです。

Keywords

💡レトリック

説得の技術や言語表現の理論を指します。この動画では、説得力のあるコミュニケーションの重要性と、効果的にメッセージを伝える方法について説明されています。「論理」「感情」「人格」の3つの要素を活用することで、聴衆を説得できると述べられています。

💡ロゴス

ロゴスとは、論理的な議論や根拠を意味します。動画では、このロゴスを「説得の論理的な側面」として位置づけ、聴衆の思考プロセスを活用する技術であると説明されています。具体例として、譲歩の利用や、聴衆の論理を利用することが挙げられています。

💡パトス

パトスは、聴衆の感情に訴えかける要素を指します。動画では、「説得における感情的な側面」と位置付けられ、聴衆の気分を理解し、共感することで、望ましい気分に導くことが重要だと説かれています。子供をなだめる場面など、実例が挙げられています。

💡エートス

エートスとは、話し手の人格や信頼性に関する要素です。動画では、「説得における人格的な側面」として、話し手の評判や信頼性が聴衆の説得に影響を与えると述べられています。子供に対しても、話し手の人格が説得力に影響すると実例が挙げられています。

💡合意形成

合意形成とは、説得を通して聴衆と合意に達することを指します。動画では、説得の最終目標は、単なる同意ではなく「行動に移してもらう」ことであると強調されています。具体例として、歯磨き粉の残量問題について、子供と合意形成することが挙げられています。

💡状況依存性

状況依存性とは、説得においては状況や文脈が重要であることを意味します。動画では、過去・現在・未来のどの時制で話をするかによって、説得の方向性が変わることが指摘されています。例えば、選択について話すときは未来形が適切であると提案されています。

💡応酬

応酬とは、議論の際に相手の意見に適切に対応することを指します。動画では、単に反論するのではなく、相手の話を受け入れ、それに基づいて議論を進める方法が有効であると説明されています。具体例として、相手の言葉に「はい、そして...」と付け加えながら会話を進める手法が紹介されています。

💡理解と共感

理解と共感とは、説得の際に聴衆の立場に立って考え、その感情を共有することを意味します。動画では、聴衆の気分や感情に共感し、それに合わせて自身の態度を変えることが重要だと強調されています。妻が夫の気持ちに同調する場面など、実例が挙げられています。

💡ディコラム

ディコラムとは、適切な身振り、話し方、態度を指します。動画では、説得の際には話し手の人格や振る舞いが重要であり、聴衆を思いやる態度が説得力につながると説明されています。具体例として、人格的な側面である「エートス」の重要性が強調されています。

💡状況の構築

状況の構築とは、説得を行う際に適切な環境や前提条件を整えることを意味します。動画では、聴衆の心理状態を理解し、望ましい状況を作り出すことが説得の成功につながると述べられています。例として、妻が夫をなだめる場面や、子供に対して適切な選択肢を提示する場面が挙げられています。

Highlights

Rhetoric is the art of influence, friendship, eloquence, ready wit, and irrefutable logic that harnesses the most powerful social forces of argument.

The three basic tools of rhetoric are logos (argument by logic), ethos (argument by character), and pathos (argument by emotion).

Concession is a powerful logos tactic where you use your opponent's argument to your advantage, taking the anger out of confrontation.

Sympathy is the most important pathos tactic - registering concern for your audience's emotions and then changing the mood to suit your argument.

Ethos, or argument by character, is the most important appeal according to Aristotle - it involves using your personality and reputation to appear trustworthy.

Set clear goals for what you want to achieve in an argument - change the audience's mood, mind, or willingness to act.

Control the tense of your argument - past tense for blame, present tense for values, future tense for making choices.

Never debate the undebatable - focus arguments on choices rather than inarguable values or morals.

Agreeability - arguing without appearing to argue by getting inside your opponent's head - is a key strategy.

Rhetoric was considered the essential skill of leadership in ancient times, used to create the world's first democracies.

The most effective rhetoric disguises its art, implanting opinions through sleight of tongue.

Aristotle assigned different branches of rhetoric to past (forensic), present (demonstrative), and future (deliberative) tenses.

Orphan Annie's law: The future has no facts, only conjectures and choices, not certainties.

Argue in the future tense to get your audience to make a choice that solves a problem to their advantage.

Decorum, or the rhetorical tactic of understanding and complying with your audience's values and expectations, is crucial for persuasion.

Transcripts

thank you for arguing thank you for

arguing it is early in the morning and

my 17 year old son eats breakfast giving

me a narrow window to use our soul

bathroom I wrap a towel around my waist

and approach the sink avoiding the Grim

side in the mirror as a writer I don't

have to shave every day marketers

despairingly call a consumer like me a

low self-monitor I do have my standards

though and hygiene is one I grab

toothbrush and toothpaste the tube is

empty the nearest replacement sits on a

shelf in our freezing basement and I'm

not dressed for the part George I yell

who used all the toothpaste a sarcastic

voice answers from the other side of the

door that's not the point is it Dad

George says the point is how we're going

to keep this from happening again Dot

and quad he has me I have told him

countless times how the most productive

arguments use the future tense the

language of choices and decisions you're

right I say you win now will you please

get me some toothpaste sure Dot and quad

George retrieves a tube happy that he

beat his father in an argument or did he

who got what he wanted in reality by

conceding his point I persuaded him if I

had simply said don't be a jerk and get

me some toothpaste George might have

stood there arguing instead I made him

feel triumphant Triumph made him

benevolent and it got me exactly what I

wanted I achieved the Pinnacle of

persuasion not just an agreement but one

that gets an audience a teenage wanted

that to do my bidding no George I win

the Matrix only cooler what kind of

father manipulates his own son oh let's

not call it manipulation call it

instruction any parent should consider

rhetoric the art of argument one of the

essential RS rhetoric is the art of

influence friendship and eloquence of

ready wit and irrefutable logic and it

harnesses the most powerful of social

forces argument whether you sense it or

not argument surrounds you it plays with

your emotions changes your attitude

talks you into a decision and goads you

to buy things argument lies behind

political labeling advertising jargon

voices gestures and guilt trips it forms

a real life Matrix the Supreme software

that drives our social lives and

rhetoric serves as arguments decoder by

teaching the tricks we use to persuade

one another the art of persuasion

reveals the Matrix and all its

manipulative Glory the Ancients

considered rhetoric the essential skill

of leadership knowledge so important

that they placed it at the center of

higher education it taught them how to

speak and write persuasively produce

something to say on every occasion and

make people like them when they spoke

after the ancient Greeks invented it

rhetoric helped create the world's first

democracies it trained Roman orders such

as Julius Caesar and Marcus tullius

Cicero and gave the Bible its finest

language it even inspired William

Shakespeare every one of America's

Founders studied rhetoric and they used

its principles in writing the

Constitution rhetoric faded in Academia

during the 1800s when social scientists

dismissed the notion that an individual

could stand up to the inexorable forces

of History who wants to teach leadership

when Academia doesn't believe in leaders

at the same time English Lit replaced

the classics an ancient thought fell out

of Vogue nonetheless a few remarkable

people continued to study the the art

Daniel Webster picked up rhetoric at

Dartmouth by joining a debating Society

the United fraternity which had an

impressive classical library and held

weekly debates years later the club

changed its name to Alpha Delta and

partied its way to immortality by

inspiring the movie Animal House to the

brother's credit they didn't forget

their classical Heritage entirely hence

the toga party scattered colleges and

universities still teach rhetoric in

fact the art is rapidly gaining

popularity among undergraduates but

outside Academia we forgot it almost

entirely what a thing to lose imagine

stumbling upon Newton's law of gravity

and meeting face to face with the forces

that drive the universe or imagine

coming across Freud for the first time

and suddenly becoming aware of the

unconscious where your id ego and

superego conduct their silent arguments

I wrote this book for that reason to

lead you through this unknown world of

argument and welcome you to the

persuasive elect along the way you'll

enhance your image with Aristotle's

three traits of credible leadership

virtue disinterest and practical wisdom

you'll find yourself using logic as a

convincing tool smacking down analyzes

and building airtight assertions

Aristotle's principles will also help

you decide which medium text phone

skywriting works best for each message

you will discover a simple strategy to

get an argument unstuck when it bogs

down an accusation and anger and that's

just the beginning the pages to come

contain more than 100 argument tools

borrowed from ancient texts and adapted

to Modern situations along with

suggestions for trying the techniques at

home school or work or in your community

you will see when logic works best and

when you should lean on an emotional

strategy you'll acquire mind-molding

figures of speech and ready-made tactics

including Aristotle's irresistible

infamine a neat bundle of logic that I

find easier to use than pronounce you'll

see how to actually benefit from your

own screw-ups and you'll discover the

most compelling tools of all in your

audience's own self-identity by the end

of the book you will have mastered the

rhetorical tricks for making an audience

eager to listen people still love a

well-delivered talk the top professional

speakers charge more per person than a

Bruce Springsteen concert I devote a

whole chapter to Cicero's elegant

five-step method for constructing a

speech invention Arrangement style

memory and delivery A system that has

served the greatest orders for the past

2000 years great argument does not

always mean elaborate speech though the

most effective rhetoric disguises its

art and so I'll reveal a rhetorical

device for implanting opinions in

people's heads through sheer sleight of

tongue besides all these practical tools

rhetoric offers a grander metaphysical

payoff it jolts you into a fresh new

perspective on The Human Condition after

it awakens you to the argument all

around the world will never seem the

same I myself am living proof my

perfectly rhetorical day to see just how

pervasive argument is I recently

attempted a whole day without persuasion

free of advertising politics family

squabbles or any psychological

manipulation whatsoever no one would

persuade me and I would avoid persuading

them heck I wouldn't even let myself

persuade myself nobody not even I would

tell me what to do if anyone could

consider himself qualified for the

experiment a confirmed hermit like me

could I work for myself indeed feed

having dropped out of a career in

journalism and Publishing I work by

myself in a cabin a considerable

distance from my house I live in a tiny

village in Northern New England a region

that boasts the most persuasion

resistant humans on the planet

advertisers have nightmares about people

like me no TV no smartphone dial up

internet I'm commercial free a walking

NPR my own individual persuasion immune

man as if my wristwatch alarm goes off

at six I normally use it to coax myself

out of bed but now I ignore it I stare

up at the ceiling where the smoke

detector blinks reassuringly if the

smoke alarm detected smoke it would

alarm rousing the heaviest sleeper the

philosopher Aristotle would approve of

the smoke detector's rhetoric he

understood the power of emotion as a

motivator for the time being the

detector has nothing to say but my cat

does she jumps on the bed and sticks her

nose in my armpit as reliable as my

watch and twice as annoying the cat

persuades remarkably well for 10 dumb

pounds of fur instead of word she uses

gesture and tone of voice potent

ingredients of argument I resist

stoically no cat is going to boss me

around this morning the watch beeps

again I wear a Timex Iron Man whose name

comes from a self-abusive athletic event

presumably if the watch works for a

masochist who subjects it to two miles

of swimming a hundred miles of biking

and 26.2 miles of running all in one day

it would work for someone like me who

spends his lunch hour walking

strenuously down to the brook to see if

there are any fish the ancient Romans

would call the Iron Man's brand appeal

argumentama for shiori argument from

strength.inquot its logic goes like this

if something works the hard way it's

more likely to work the easy way

advertisers favor the argument from

strength years ago Life cereal ran an ad

with little Mikey the fussy eater his

two older brothers tested the cereal on

him figuring that if Mikey liked it

anybody would and he liked it an

argumentum of for sure cereal ad my Iron

Man watch his own argument from strength

does not affect me however I bought it

because it was practical remember I'm

advertising immune but its beeping is

driving me crazy easy here I'm not even

up yet and I already contemplate

emotional appeals from a cat and a smoke

detector along with a wristwatch

argument from strength wrenching myself

out of bed I say to the mirror what I

tell it every morning don't take any

crap from anyone Dot and quad the cat

bites me on the heel I grab my towel and

go fix its breakfast five minutes later

I'm out of toothpaste and arguing with

my son not a good start to my experiment

but I'll chalk it up to what scientists

euphemistically call an artifact

translation bone-headed mistake and move

on I make coffee grab a pen and begin

writing ostentatiously in a notebook

this does little good in the literary

sense I can barely read my own scribble

before coffee but it produces wonderful

rhetorical results when my wife sees me

writing she often brings me breakfast

did I just violate my own experiment

shielding The Notebook from view I write

a grocery list there that counts as

writing Dorothy returned to full-time

work after I quit my job the deal was

that I would take over the cooking but

she loves to see her husband as the

inspired author and herself as the able

enabler my wife is a babe and many babes

go for inspired authors of course she

might be persuading Me by acting as the

kind of Babe who goes for inspired

authors she turns me on desire underlies

the most Insidious and enjoyable forms

of argument we live in a tangled Dark

World of persuasion a used car salesman

once seduced me out of 15 grand my

family and I had just moved to

Connecticut and I needed cheap

Transportation it had been a tough move

I was out of sorts the man at the car

lot had me pegged before I said a word

he pointed to a humble looking Ford

Taurus sedan suggested a test drive and

as soon as I buckled and he said want to

see PT Barnum's grave of course I did

the place was awesome we had to stop for

peacocks and Brilliant green feral

Peruvian parrots squawked in the

branches of a huge fur tree opposite

Barnum's impressive Monument stood

General Tom Thumb's marker with a

life-size statue of the 26-inch

millionaire enthralled by our test drive

I did everything else the salesman

suggested and he suggested I buy the

fort it was a lemon he sized me up and

changed my mood he beguiled me and to

tell you the truth I enjoyed it I had

some misgivings the next morning but no

regrets it was a consensual act which

leads us to arguments grand prize the

consensus it means more than just an

agreement much more than a compromise

the consensus represents an audience's

Common Sense thinking in fact it is a

common sense a shared faith and a choice

the decision or action you want and this

is where emotional persuasion comes in

as Saint Augustine knew Faith requires

emotion persuasion is manipulation

manipulation is half of argument and

therefore many of us understandably shy

from it but even Aristotle that logical

old soul believed in the Curative powers

of persuasion logic alone will rarely

get people to do anything they have to

desire the ACT you may not like

Persuasions manipulative aspects still

it beats fighting which is what we

usually mistake for argument birds do it

Meanwhile my experiment gets more

dubious by the moment I'm leaving the

bathroom when Dorothy puts a plate of

eggs on the table shrugs into her suit

jacket and kisses me goodbye don't

forget that I'll be home late I'm having

heavier hors d'oeuvres of the reception

tonight she says and leaves for her

fundraising job at a law school

fundraising and law could it get more

rhetorical I turned to George so want to

have dinner with me or on campus Tonight

George attends a boarding school as a

day student he hates the food there I

don't know he says I'll call you from

School dot and quad I want to work late

and don't feel like cooking but I'm

loathe to have George think my work

takes priority over him okay I say

adding with as much enthusiasm as I can

fake we'll have Stu UK says George right

on cue he hates my stew even more than

School food the odds of my cooking

tonight have just gone way down oops has

that fine rhetorician Britney Spears put

it I did it again and so goes my day in

my cabin office I email editors with

flattering explanations for missing

their deadlines I'm just trying to live

up to their high standards I put off

calling Sears to complain about a 147

bill for replacing a screw in our oven

when I do call eventually I'll take my

time planning the situation giving me a

break on the bill will cost less than

dealing with me any further at noon I

grab some lunch and head outside for a

walk a small pile of fox cat lies atop a

large granite rock mine the Fox Says

with the scat this spot belongs to me

territorial creatures such as foxes and

suburbanites use complicated signals to

mark off terrain and discourage

Intruders musk fences scat marriage

licenses Footprints alarm systems

argument is in our nature literally a

Mockingbird sings a pretty little tune

that warns Rivals off its Turf without a

pause it does the same thing in Reverse

rendering a figure of speech called

chiasmus this crisscross figure repeats

a phrase with its Mirror Image you can

take a boy out of the country but you

can't take the country out of a boy Dot

and quad I wasted time and now time

dothwaist me Dot and quad our culture

underrates figures but only because most

of us lack the rhetorical Savvy to wield

them they can yield surprising power

John F Kennedy deployed a chiasmus

during his inaugural address asked not

what your country can do for you ask

what you can do for your country and

thousands join the Peace Corps I fell in

love with figures and even launched a

website figarospeech.com devoted to them

figures add polish to a memo or paper

and in day-to-day conversation they can

supply ready wit to the most tedious

conversations the phone is ringing when

I get back to my cabin it's George

calling to say he plans to eat at school

yes so I work late rewarding myself now

and then by playing computer pinball I

find I can sit still for longer

stretches with game breaks is this

persuasion I suppose it is my

non-ratorical day turned out to be

pretty darn rhetorical but nonetheless

agreeable I finally knock off work and

head back to the house for a shower and

shave even though this isn't a shaving

day my wife deals with a lot of good

looking well-dressed men and now and

then I like to make a territorial call

through grooming and clothing to

convince her she did not marry a bomb a

pull on a cashmere sweater that Dorothy

says makes my eyes look bedroomy and

meet her at the door with a cold gin and

tonic let the persuasion begin offense

2. set your goals Cicero's light bulb

change the audience's mood mind or

willingness to act Aphrodite spoke and

loosened from her bosom the embroidered

girdle of Many Colors into which all her

allurements were fashioned and it was

love and in it desire and in a blanching

persuasion which steals the mind even of

the wise Homer back in 1974 National

Lampoon published a parody comic book

version of Plato's Republic Socrates

stands around talking philosophy with a

few friends each time he makes a point

another guy concedes yes Socrates very

well put dot and quad in the next frame

you see an explosive pal and the

opponent goes flying through the air

Socrates wins by a knockout the

Lampoon's Republic has some historical

validity ancient Greeks like

argumentative nerds throughout the ages

love to imagine themselves as Fighters

but even they knew the real life

difference between fighting and arguing

we should too we need to distinguish

rhetorical argument from the blame

shifting he said she said squabbling

that defines conflict today in a fight

each disputant tries to win in an

argument they try to win over an

audience which can comprise the

onlookers television viewers an

electorate or each other this chapter

will help you distinguish between an

argument and a fight and to choose what

you want to get out of an argument the

distinction can determine the survival

of a marriage as the celebrated research

psychologist John gottman proved in the

1980s and 1990s working out of his love

Lab at the University of Washington he

and his assistants videotaped hundreds

of married couples over a period of nine

years pouring over every tape and

entering every perceived emotion and

logical Point into a database they

watched hours and days and months of

arguments of couples glaring at each

other and revealing embarrassing things

in front of the camera it was like a bad

reality show when gottman announced his

findings in 1994 though rhetoricians

around the country tried not to look

smug because the data confirmed what

rhetoric has claimed for several

Millennia gottman found the couples who

stayed married over those nine years

argued about as much as those who ended

up in divorce however the successful

couples went about their arguments in a

different way and with a different

purpose rhetoricians would say they

instinctively follow the basic 10

minutes of argument when some of the

videotapes appeared on network

television they showed some decidedly

uncomfortable moments even among the

happy couples one successfully married

husband admitted he was pathologically

lazy and his wife cheerfully agreed

nonetheless the couples who stayed

married seemed to use their disputes to

solve problems and work out differences

they showed faith in the outcome the

doomed couples on the other hand used

their sessions to attack each other

argument was a problem for them not a

means to a solution the happy ones

argued the unhappy ones fought much of

the time I'm guessing that the happy

ones also enticed while our culture

tends to admire Straight Shooters the

ones who follow their gut regardless of

what anyone thinks those people rarely

get their way in the end sure aggressive

loudmouths often win temporary victories

through intimidation or simply by

talking us to exhaustion but the more

subtle eloquent approaches lead to

long-term commitment corporate

recruiters will confirm this Theory

there are a few Alpha types in the

business world who live to bully their

colleagues and stomp on the competition

but if you ask Headhunters what they

look for in executive material they

describe a Persuader and team Builder

not an aggressor you succeed in an

argument when you persuade your audience

you win a fight when you dominate the

enemy a territorial dispute in the back

seat of a car fails to qualify as

argument for example unless each child

makes the unlikely attempt to persuade

instead of scream I see your point

sister however have you considered the

analogy of the international Frontier at

the age of two my son George became a

devotee of what rhetoricians call

argument by the stick when words failed

him he used his fists after every fight

I would ask him did you get the other

kid to agree with you for years he

considered that to be a thoroughly

stupid question and maybe it was but

eventually it made sense to him argument

by the stick fighting is no argument it

never persuades it only inspires revenge

or retreat in a fight one person takes

out his aggression on another Donald

Trump was fighting when he said of Rosie

O'Donnell I mean I'd look at her right

in that fat ugly face of hers I'd say

Rosie you're fired on the other hand

when George former and tries to sell you

a grill he makes an argument persuasion

that tries to change your mood your mind

or your willingness to do something

Homer Simpson offers a legitimate

argument when he demonstrates our

intellectual superiority to dolphins

don't forget we invented computers leg

warmers bendy straws peel and eat shrimp

and the pudding cup Dot and quad Mariah

Carey pitches an argument when she sings

We Belong Together to an assumed

ex-boyfriend she tries to change his

mind and judging by all the moaning in

the background get some action Taylor

Swift undramatically telling Katy Perry

we got bad blood fight business proposal

argument Bernie Sanders saying

Republicans have declared war on the

middle class in fact anyone who deploys

the war metaphor fight Yogi Bera saying

it's not the heat it's the humility

argument the basic difference between an

argument and a fight an argument done

skillfully gets people to want to do

what you want you fight to win you argue

to achieve agreement that may sound

wimpy under some circumstances though

argument can take a great deal of

Courage it can even and determine a

nation's fate ancient rhetoricians

dreaded most the kind of government led

by a demagogue a power mad dictator who

uses rhetorical skills for evil the last

century shows how right the Ancients

were but the cure for the Dark Side of

persuasion they said is the other side

even if the stakes aren't quite as high

if the evildoer is a rival at work or a

wacky organization on campus your

rhetorical skills can balance the

equation but rhetoric offers a more

selfish reason for arguing learn its

tools and you'll become the face to

watch the rising star you'll mold the

minds of men and women to your will and

make any group yield to the Dominion of

your voice even more important you'll

get them to want a yield to commit to

your plan and to consider the result of

consensus you will make them desire what

you desire entice them into a consensual

act how to beguile a cop a police patrol

stops you on the highway and you roll

your window down you what's wrong

officer cop did you know that the speed

limit here is 50 you how fast was I

going cop 55 the temptation to reply

with a Snappy answer is awful you whoa

lock me up and indeed the satisfaction

might be worth the speeding ticket and

risk of arrest but rewind the scene and

pause it where the cop says 55. inquot

Now set your personal goal what would

you like to accomplish in this situation

perhaps you would like to make the cop

look like an idiot your Snappy answer

accomplishes that especially if you have

passengers for an audience good for you

of course the cop is unlikely to respond

kindly the result will be a fight and

you are the likely loser how about

getting him to apologize for being a

martinat sorry you have to set a

realistic goal Judge Judy and Daniel

Webster combined could not get this cop

to apologize instead suppose we said as

your personal goal the avoidance of a

ticket now how are we to do that to win

a deliberative argument don't try to

outscore your opponent try instead to

get your way it's unlikely that your

opponent knows any rhetoric he probably

thinks that the sole point of an

argument is to humiliate you or get you

to admit defeat this cognitive

dissonance can be useful your opponent's

aggressiveness makes a wonderful

argument tool does he want to score

points let him score points all you want

to do is win to get your audience to

accept your choice or do what you want

it to do people often win arguments on

points only to lose the battle although

polls show that Barack Obama and Mitt

Romney scored a tie during their three

debates Romney's popularity spiked the

audience liked Obama's logic but they

liked Romney better temporarily even if

your argument includes only you and

another person with no one else looking

on you still have an audience the other

person in that case there are two ways

to come out on top either by winning the

argument getting your opponent to admit

defeat or by losing it let's try both

strategies on your cop one when the

argument with a bomb proof excuse you my

wife's in labor I need to get her to the

hospital stat cop you're driving alone

sir you oh my God I forgot my wife

chances are this kind of cop won't care

if your wife is having triplets all over

the living room floor but if the excuse

works you win 2. play the Good Citizen

you assume the cop wants you to be

conceit his point you I'm sure you're

right officer I should have been

watching my speedometer more good you

just let the cop win on points now get

him to let you off easy you I must have

been watching the road too closely can

you suggest a way for me to follow my

speedometer without getting distracted

this approach appeals to the cop's

expertise it might work as long as you

keep any sarcasm out of your voice but

assume that the appeal needs a little

more sweetening cop you can start by

driving under the speed limit then you

won't have to watch your speedometer so

much you well that's true I could I've

been tailgated a lot when I do that but

that's their problem isn't it cop right

you worry about your own driving you I

will this has helped a lot thanks now

what do you think is most likely to

happen I can tell you what won't happen

the cop won't order you out of the car

he won't tell you to stand spread

eagleed against it while he Pats you

down even yell at you you took the anger

out of the argument which these days is

no mean accomplishment and if he

actually does let you off with a warning

congratulations you win the cop may not

recognize it but you have just notched

the best kind of win he leaves happy and

so do you the easiest way to exploit

your opponent's desire to score points

is to let him concede a point that will

not damage your case irreparably when

your kid says you never let me have any

fun you say I suppose I Dawn apostrophe

T Dot and quad when a co-worker says

that'll never work you say hmm maybe not

DOT and qua then use that point to

change her mood or her mind in other

words one way to get people to agree

with you is to agree with them

tactically that is agreeing upfront does

not mean giving up the argument instead

use your opponent's point to get what

you want practice rhetorical Jiu Jitsu

by using your opponent's own moves to

throw him off balance does upfront

agreeing seem to lack and stand up for

your selfishness yes I suppose it does

but wimps like us shall inherit the

rhetorical Earth while the rest of the

world fights will argue and argument

gets you what you want more than

fighting does the rhetoric diet changing

the mood is the easiest goal and usually

the one you work on first Saint

Augustine a one-time rhetoric professor

and one of the fathers of the Christian

church they famously buffer sermons The

Secret he said was not to be content

merely with seizing the audience's

sympathetic attention he was never

satisfied until he made them cry

Augustine could not have been invited to

many parties as one of the great

sermonizers of all time he converted

pagans to Christianity through sheer

emotional pyrotechnics by changing your

audience's emotion you make them more

vulnerable to your argument put them in

the mood to listen ringing tears from an

audience is easy compared to goal number

two making them decide what you want

Henry Kissinger used a classic

persuasive method when he served as

Nixon's National Security advisor he

would lay out five alternatives for the

president to choose from listing the

most extreme choices first and last and

putting the one Kissinger preferred in

the middle Nixon inevitably chose the

correct option according to Kissinger

not exactly the most subtle tactic but

I've seen it used successfully in

corporate PowerPoint presentations

usually since most arguments take place

between two people most of the time you

deal with just two choices yours and

your opponents my daughter Dorothy Jr

makes especially difficult adversary

although she enjoys argument much less

than her brother does she can be equally

persuasive she launches an argument so

gently you fail to realize you're in one

I once visited her in London where she

was spending a term as a college student

my first evening there she proposed

dinner at a low price Indian restaurant

I wanted to play the generous dad and

take her someplace fancier guess who won

Emmy we could still eat Indian but some

place more upscale Emmy we could still

eat Indian but someplace more upscale

Dorothy Jr sure Emmy so do you know of

any Dorothy Jr oh London's full of them

Emmy aha so do you know of any in

particular Dorothy Jr vaguely oh yeah

Emmy any near here Dorothy Jr not really

me so you'd rather eat at your usual

place Dorothy Jr if you want to Sure

Emmy I don't want to and then I felt

guilty about losing my patience which

though she denies it may have been

Dorothy Junior's strategy all along we

aided her usual place she won using my

guilt as her emotional goal Dorothy

couldn't have done better if she had

prepared a ciceronian speech in advance

Cicero might even approve the most

effective rhetoric disguises itself he

said Dorothy knew this instinctively she

has a biting tongue but knows how to

restrain it to win an argument still

Dorothy had it relatively easy we were

going to dinner one way or another all

she had to do was pull me toward her

choice goal number three in which you

get an audience to do something or to

stop doing it is the most difficult it

requires a different more personal level

of emotion one of Desire suppose I

didn't want to go to dinner at all

Dorothy would have had a lot more

arguing to do to get me out the door

that's like getting a horse to drink to

use an old expression you can give the

horse salt to stimulate its desire for

water arousing its emotions if you will

and you can persuade it to follow you to

a stream the choice part but getting it

to commit to drinking poses the toughest

rhetorical problem up until recently get

out the vote campaigns for young people

have been notoriously bad at this the

kids flock to rock concerts and grab the

free T-shirts they got all charged up

and maybe even registered as Democrats

or Republicans a Triumph of persuasion

as far as emotions and choice were

concerned but until such tribal media as

Facebook and Snapchat enter the picture

showing up at the polls on Election Day

was something else altogether youth

turned stubborn at the getting to drink

part I meant that metaphorically besides

using desire to motivate an audience you

need to convince it that an action is no

big deal that whatever you want them to

do won't make them sweat a few years ago

when I was an editorial director at the

rodel publishing company I heard that

some people in another division were

working on a diet book God I thought

another diet as if there weren't enough

already plus the title they planned for

the book made no sense to me it referred

to a particular neighborhood in a major

city a place most Americans probably had

never heard of the author a cardiologist

happened to live there but who would buy

a book called the South Beach Diet so

I'm a lousy prognosticator of best

sellers in retrospect however I can

explain why the title was not such a bad

idea after all South Beach conjures an

image of people you and bathing attire

it says vacation one of the chief

reasons people go on a diet the rodale

editor stimulated an emotion by making

readers picture a desirable and highly

personal goal you in a bathing suit

looking great so much for the desire

part the book subtitle employs the no

big deal tactic the delicious doctor

designed foolproof plan for fast and

healthy weight loss no suffering

perfectly safe instant results they hit

all the buttons except for so you can

eat like a glutton and get hit on by

lifeguards people took action in droves

the book has sold in the millions the

tools this chapter gave you basic

devices to determine the outcome of an

argument set your personal goal set your

goals for your audience do you want to

change their mood their mind or their

willingness to carry out what you want

3. control the tense Orphan Annie's law

the three basic issues of rhetoric deal

with Time March Homer it's very easy to

criticize Homer and fun two The Simpsons

you have your personal goal what you

want out of the argument and your

audience goals move food mind action now

before you begin arguing ask yourself

one more question what's the issue

According to Aristotle all issues boil

down to just three the Greeks were crazy

about that number blame values choice

you can slot any kind of issue involving

persuasion into one of these categories

who Moved My Cheese this of course is a

blame issue whodunit should abortion be

legal values what's morally right or

wrong about letting a woman choose

whether or not to end the budding life

inside her own body my choice of words

implies the values each side holds a

woman's right to her own body and the

sanctity of life should we build a plan

in Detroit choice to build or not to

build Detroit or not Detroit should

Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have split

up values not moral ones necessarily but

what you and your interlocutor value

were they just too hot to separate did

OJ do it blame shall we dance choice to

dance or not to dance why should you

care which question slots into which

core issue it matters because you will

never meet your goals if you argue

around the wrong core issue watch a

couple in their living room reading

books and listening to music she can you

turn that down a little he you're the

one who set the volume last she oh

really then who was a blasting free bird

all over the place this afternoon he so

that's what this is about you hate my

music what does she want out of this

argument quiet it's a choice issue she

wants him to choose to turn the music

down but instead of choices the argument

turns to blame then values blame you're

the one who set the volume last values

so that's what this is about you hate my

music it's hard to make a positive

choice about turning the volume knob

when you argue about a pass noise

violation and the existential qualities

of free bird Dot and quad the examples I

gave of the core issues blame values and

choice show a certain pattern the blame

questions deal with the past the values

questions are in the present tense and

the choice questions have to do with the

future blame equals past values equals

present Choice equals future if you find

an argument spinning out of control try

switching the tents to pin blame on the

cheese thief use the past tense to get

someone to believe that abortion is a

terrible sin use the present tense the

future though is the best tense for

getting peace and quiet in the living

room Aristotle who devised a form of

rhetoric for each of the tenses like the

future best of all the rhetoric of the

past he said deals with issues of

Justice this is the judicial argument of

the courtroom Aristotle called it

forensic rhetoric because it covers

forensics our music challenged couple

uses the past tense for blaming each

other he you're the one who set the

volume last she then who was at blasting

free bird if you want to try someone on

charges of volume abuse not to mention

bad taste you're in the right tense

forensic argument helps us determine who

done it not who's doing it or who will

do it watch Law and Order or CSI and

you'll notice that most of the dialogue

is in the past tense it works great for

lawyers and cops but a loving couple

should be wary of the tense the purpose

of forensic rhetoric is to determine

guilt and meet out punishment couples

who get in the habit of punishing each

other suffer the same fate as the doomed

marriages in Dr gottman's Love job how

about the present tense is that any

better it can be the rhetoric of the

present handles praise and condemnation

separating the good from the bad

distinguishing groups from other groups

and individuals from each other

Aristotle reserved the present for

describing people who meet a community's

ideals or fail to live up to them it is

the communal language of commencement

addresses funeral orations and sermons

it celebrates heroes or condemns a

common enemy it gives people a sort of

tribal identity we're great terrorists

are cowards when a leader has trouble

confronting the future you hear similar

tribal talk Aristotle's term for this

kind of language is demonstrative

rhetoric because ancient orders used it

to demonstrate their fanciest techniques

our argumentative couple uses it to

divide each other he so that's what this

is about you hate my music you might say

that the man Bears Soul blame for

switching tenses from past to present

but let's not get all forensic on each

other okay the man may be right after

all perhaps the argument has to do with

the guy's thing for Leonard Skinner to

not the volume knob in any case their

dialogue has suddenly turned tribe Bible

I like my music you hate it if the man

happened to be a politician he would

find it hard to resist adding and that's

just wrong we use the present tense to

talk about values that is wrong this is

right detesting Freebird is morally

wrong if you want to make a joint

decision you need to focus on the future

this is the tense that Aristotle saved

for his favorite rhetoric he called it

deliberative because it argues about

choices and helps us decide how to meet

our mutual goals deliberative arguments

Chief topic is the advantageous

According to Aristotle this is the most

pragmatic kind of rhetoric it skips

right and wrong good and bad in favor of

expedience present tense demonstrative

rhetoric tends to finish with people

bonding or separating past tense

forensic rhetoric threatens punishment

future tense deliberative argument

promises a payoff you can see why

Aristotle dedicated the rhetoric of

decision making to the Future our poor

couple remains stranded in the present

tense so let's rewind their dialogue and

make them speak deliberatively in the

future tense that is she can you turn

that down a little he

sure I'd be happy to wait shouldn't he

say I'll be happy to I will not I would

well sure you're probably right he could

but by using the conditional mood would

instead of Willie leaves himself an

opening he but is the music too loud or

do you want me to play something else

she well now that you mention it I'd

prefer something a little less hair

Bandy ouch he plays nice and she insults

the entire classic rock genre that makes

him feel Justified and retaliating but

he does it moderately he something more

elevator-ish you mean that doesn't

really turn me on want to watch a movie

by turning the argument back to choices

the man keeps it from getting too

personal and possibly keeps her off

balance making her a bit more vulnerable

to persuasion she what do you have in

mind he we haven't seen that Avengers

movie in ages she Avengers I hate that

movie as he well knows this is a little

off topic but I can't resist giving you

another rhetorical trick propose an

extreme Choice first it will make the

one you want sound more reasonable I use

the technique myself in getting my wife

to agree to name our son after my Uncle

George I propose lots of Alternatives my

personal favorite was Herman Melville

heinrichs until she finally said you

know George doesn't really sound that

bad Dot and quad I kissed her and told

her how much I loved her and notched

another argument on my belt back to our

couple he well then how about Titanic he

knows she would prefer a different movie

she gets seasick easily but it doesn't

sound that bad after the first choice

she okay Titanic it is which happens to

be the movie he wanted in the first

place the distinctions between the three

forms of rhetoric can determine the

success of a democracy a business or a

family remember the argument I had with

my son George Emmy who used all the

toothpaste George that's not the

question is it Dad the question is how

are we going to keep it from happening

again sarcasm aside the kid deserves

credit for switching the rhetoric from

past to Future from forensic to

deliberative he put the argument in

decision-making mode what choice will

give us the best Advantage for shocking

an endless supply of toothpaste and he's

pretty sure bet hold on the future

sounds lovely but isn't civil discourse

supposed to be about sticking to the

facts The Future Has No facts right

doesn't it simply speculate correct

facts do not exist in the future we can

know that the sun came up yesterday and

that it shines now but we can only

predict that the sun will come up

tomorrow when Little Orphan Annie sings

that god-awful tomorrow song she doesn't

make a fact-based argument she bets like

a proper Aristotelian Annie even admits

the case bet your bottom dollar that

tomorrow they'll be sun and he concedes

that the sunrise has not yet become a

fact call it Orphan Annie's law the sun

only may come up tomorrow a successful

argument like anything about the future

cannot stick to the facts deliberative

argument can use facts but it must not

limit itself to them while you and I can

disagree about the capital of Burkina

Faso we're not arguing deliberatively we

simply dispute a fact neither of us can

decide to make it wagadugu we merely

look it up I just looked it up all we

have for the future is conjecture or

choices not facts when Homer Simpson

argues with his wife in the future tense

of deliberative argument facts have

nothing to do with it Marge Homer I

don't want you driving around in a car

you built yourself Homer you can sit

there complaining or you can knit me

some seat belts instead of helping us to

find some elusive truth deliberative

argument deliberates weighing one choice

against the other considering the

circumstances choices Beach or mountains

this summer should your company replace

its computers or hire a competent Tech

staff should a 10 year old be on

Snapchat does it make sense to go to

Mars when you argue about values you use

demonstrative rhetoric not deliberative

if you rely on a cosmic Authority God or

Beyonce then the audience has no choice

to make

Eternal truths will answer these is

there a god is homosexuality immoral is

capitalism bad should all students know

the Ten Commandments in each case the

argument has to rely on morals and

metaphysics and it takes place mostly in

the present tense the language of

demonstrative rhetoric it can be

particularly maddening in a marital

dispute cute because it comes across as

preachy demonstrative rhetoric is the

rhetoric of preachers after all besides

it is far more difficult to change

someone's values than to change her mind

after all Eternal truths are supposed to

be

Eternal caller I don't know much about

the Democrats but candidate m is a jerk

next caller I'm unbelievably angry at

that caller if she saw what a good

Christian candidate m is she'd shut her

mouth host put her in a borka baby

practical concerns are open to

deliberative debate because deliberation

has to do with choices everything about

it depends on the circumstances the time

the people involved and whatever public

you mean when you talk about public

opinion deliberative argument relies on

public opinion not a higher power to

resolve questions the audience's opinion

will answer these should the state

legislature raise taxes to fund decent

schools should you raise your kids

allowance when should your company

release its newest product if you reply

that's just wrong to an argument you use

demonstrative values rhetoric if you

reply lie on the other hand then your

argument has a chance of making a choice

father our kid could break her neck on

those old monkey bars mother on the

other hand she may not besides the

coordination she learns might prevent

future accidents and it might not

choices are full of these what-if

scenarios and deliberative discourse

deals with their probabilities in The

Simpsons and endless source of

rhetorical material Ned Flanders a

born-again Christian attacks Mo the

bartender with demonstrative present

tense rhetoric and Moe makes a weak

attempt at the conjectural language of

deliberative rhetoric Ned Flanders you

ugly hate-filled man Mo hey I may be

ugly and I may be hate-filled but ah

what was the last thing you said

deliberation is the rhetoric of choice

literally it deals with decisions and

decisions depend on particular

circumstances not Eternal truths and

cold facts if life were free of

contingencies then we could live by a

few rules written in stone that would

apply to all our decisions every baby

would come with an operating manual the

same guy that worked for her older

brother ever every rule of thumb would

apply to every situation the early bird

would always catch the worm everything

would be Cheaper by the Dozen and the

world would come in two colors black and

white but alas it doesn't sometimes

under some circumstances say jumping out

of an airplane for the first time it's a

very bad idea to look before you leap

sometimes the enemy of your enemy makes

a terrible friend besides people like

choices more than they like being told

they don't measure up what if I had

ignored George's focus on the future and

brought the argument to the present Emmy

a good son wouldn't use up all the

toothpaste good Sons show consideration

I'm guessing I would have been without

toothpaste hearing me imply he was a bad

son George would have done his best to

confirm that reputation the past

wouldn't get me toothpaste neither would

the present only the future will get my

teeth clean Girl vs Turkey a husband and

wife debate over whether to invest more

in stocks or in bonds he let's get

aggressive with growth stocks she the

experts predict the market will tank

this year I say we stay conservative Why

argue because they can't predict the the

economic future they can only take their

best guess today what would that

argument look like in the present tense

he my dad always said blue chips are the

way to go that's the right kind of

investment she well that's just wrong my

astrologer says blue chips are evil the

same couple argues over whether to

provide orthodontia for their

ten-year-old she straight teeth will be

good for his self-esteem he yeah but if

we put the money into a college fund

we'll have a debt-free college graduate

she a buck-toothed college graduate is

there a right choice maybe but they

don't know what it is and have to make a

decision nonetheless these questions

deal with probabilities not facts or

values suppose your Uncle Randy decides

to divorce your aunt on their 30th

Anniversary so he can marry a surfing

instructor he met a Club Med you have

two issues here one moral and the other

practical the moral issue is inarguable

by our definition your uncle is either

wrong or right you could remind him that

he is breaking a wonderful woman's heart

but you would be sermonizing not arguing

you could threaten to borrow him from

Thanksgiving dinner but that would be

coercion not argument assuming he would

prefer your turkey to a cruise buffet

with his Club Med hottie the Practical

debatable issue in your uncle's case

deals with the likely consequences of

ditching your aunt for the trophy wife

you she'll leave you within the year and

you'll be lonely and miserable forever

Uncle no she won't and a young woman

will make me feel younger which means

I'll live longer which prediction is

true neither of you has a clue but Uncle

Randy might persuade you that he has

good practical reasons for remarrying

will he ever convince you that he is

morally in the right not a chance morals

are an arguable and deliberative

rhetoric arguments rule number one never

debate the undebatable instead focus on

your goals the next chapter tells you

how to achieve them the tools we expect

are arguments to accomplish something

you want a debate to settle an issue

with everyone walking away in agreement

with you this is hard to achieve if no

one can get Beyond who is right or wrong

good or bad why do so many arguments end

up in accusation and name calling the

answer may seem silly but it's crucial

most arguments take place in the wrong

tense choose the right tense if you want

your audience to make a choice focus on

the future tenses are so important that

Aristotle assigned a whole branch of

rhetoric to each one we'll get into

tenses in much greater detail in the

chapters to come you'll see how you can

use values to win an argument about

choices meanwhile remember these tools

control the issue do you want to fix

blame Define who meets or abuses your

common values or get your audience to

make a choice the most productive

arguments use Choice as their Central

issue don't let a debate swerve

heedlessly into values or guilt keep it

focused on choices that solve a problem

to your audiences and your advantage

control the clock keep your argument in

the right tense in a debate over choices

make sure it turns to the Future 4.

soften them up at the age of seven my

son George insisted on wearing shorts to

school in the middle of winter we live

in icy New Hampshire where playground

snow has all the fluffy goodness of

ground glass my wife launched the

argument in the Classic Family manner

you talked to him she said so I talked

to him being a student of rhetoric I

employed Aristotle's three most powerful

tools of persuasion argument by

character argument by Logic argument by

emotion in this chapter you will see how

each of these tools works and you'll

gain some techniques the persuasive use

of decorum argument Jiu Jitsu tactical

sympathy that will put you well on the

way to becoming an argument Adept the

first thing I used on George was

argument by character I gave him my

Stern father act Emmy you have to wear

pants and that's final George why Emmy

because I told you too that's why but he

just looked at me with tears in his eyes

next I tried reasoning with him using

argument by Logic Emmy pants will keep

your legs from chapping you'll feel a

lot better George but I want to wear

shorts so I resorted to manipulating his

emotions following Cicero who claimed

that humor was one of the most

persuasive of all rhetorical passions I

hiked up my pant legs and pranced around

Emmy doe-to-do look at me here I go off

to work wearing shorts don't I look

stupid George yes continues to pull

shorts on me so why do you insist on

wearing shorts self George because I

don't look stupid and they're my legs I

don't mind if they get chaffed Emmy

chapped Superior vocabulary and all I

seem to be losing my case besides George

was making his first genuine attempt to

argue instead of cry so I decided to let

him win this one Emmy all right you can

wear shorts in school if your mother and

I can clear it with the authorities but

you have to put your snow pants on when

you go outside deal George deal he

happily fetched his snow pants and I

called the school a few weeks later the

principal declared George's birthday

shorts day she even showed up in

culottes herself it was mid-February was

that a good idea for the sake of

argument an agreement I believe it was

Aristotle's big three I used my best

arguments by character logic and emotion

so how did George still manage to beat

me by using the same tools I did it on

purpose and he did it instinctively

Aristotle called them logos ethos and

pathos and so will I because the

meanings of the Greek versions are

richer than those of the English

versions together they form the three

basic tools of rhetoric logos is

argument by Logic if arguments were

children logos would be the brainy one

the big sister who gets top grades in

high school logos isn't just about

following rules of logic it's a set of

techniques that use what the audience is

thinking ethos or argument by character

employs the persuader's personality

reputation and ability to look

trustworthy while logo sweats over its

GPA ethos gets elected class president

in rhetoric a sterling reputation is

more than just good it's persuasive I

taught my children that lying isn't just

wrong it's unpersuasive an audience is

more likely to believe a trustworthy

Persuader and to accept his argument a

person's life persuades better than his

word said one of Aristotle's

contemporaries this remains true today

rhetoric shows how to shine a flattering

light on your life then you have pathos

or argument by emotion The Sibling the

others disrespect but who gets away with

everything logicians and language snobs

hate pathos but Aristotle himself the

man who invented logic recognized its

usefulness you can persuade someone

logically but as we saw in chapter 3

getting him out of his chair to act on

it takes something more combustible

logos ethos and pathos appeal to the

brain gut and heart of your audience

while our brain tries to sort the facts

our gut tells us whether we can trust

the other person and our heart makes us

want to do something about it they form

the essence of effective persuasion

George instinctively used all three to

counter my own arguments his ethos put

mine in check me you have to wear pants

because I told you too George they're my

legs his logos also canceled mine out

even if his medical terminology didn't

me pants will make your legs feel better

George I don't mind if they get chaffed

finally I found his pathos irresistible

when he was little the kid would

actually stick his lower lip out when he

tried not to cry Cicero loved this

technique not the lip part but the

appearance of struggling for

self-control it serves to amplify the

mood in the room Cicero also said a

genuine emotion persuades more than a

faked one and George's tears certainly

were genuine trying not to cry just made

his eyes well up more I wish I could say

my pathos was as effective but George

failed to think it funny when I hiked my

pants up he just agreed that I looked

stupid I had been studying rhetoric

pretty intensively at that point and to

be thrown to the mat by a seven-year-old

was humiliating so was facing my wife

afterward Dorothy Sr so did you talk to

him Emmy yeah I handled it George picked

that moment to walk into the room with

his shorts on Dorothy Sr a deal which

somehow allows him to wear shorts to

school Emmy I told you I handled it so

what if his legs look like stalks of

rhubarb when he came home while I was

moderately concerned about the state of

his skin and more apprehensive about

living up to Dorothy's expectations

neither had much to do with my personal

goal to raise persuasive children if

George was willing to put all he had

into an argument I was willing to

concede that time I like to think we

both won in high school he expressed his

individuality in the opposite way he

wore ties to school and even pants Logos

Pathos and Ethos usually work together

to win an argument debates with

argumentative seven-year-olds accepted

by using your opponent's logic and your

audience's emotion you can win over your

audience with greater ease you make them

happy to let you control the argument

logos use the logic in the room later on

we'll get into rhetoric's more dramatic

logical tactics and show how to bowl

your audience over with your eloquence

first though let's Master the most

powerful logos tool of all concession it

seems more Jedi Knight than Rambo

involving more self-mastery than Brute

Force but it lies closer to the power

center of logos than rhetoric's more

grandiloquent methods even the most

aggressive Maneuvers allow room for the

opponent's ideas and the audience's

preconceptions to persuade people to

make them desire your choice and commit

to the action you want you need all the

Assets in the room and one of the best

resources comes straight from your

opponent's mouth in the comic strip

Calvin and Hobbes Calvin concedes

effectively when his dad tries to teach

him to ride a bike Dad look Calvin

you've got to relax a little your

balance will be better if you're loose

Calvin I can't help it imminent death

makes me tense I admit it clever boy

perched atop a homicidal bike he still

manages to gain control of the argument

by agreeing that he's tense he shifts

the issue from nerves to Peril where he

has a better argument sales people love

to use concession to sell you stuff I

once had a boss who came from a sales

background he proved that old habits die

hard the guy never disagreed with me yet

half the time he got me to do the

opposite of what I proposed Emmy our

research shows that readers love

beautiful covers without a lot of type

boss beautiful covers sure Emmy I know

that clean covers violate the usual

rules for selling magazines on the

newsstand but we should test dual covers

half of them will be crammed with the

usual headlines and half of them with a

big bold image very little type Boss

clean covers great idea how that affect

your budget me it'll cost a lot I'm

gambling on selling more magazines boss

so you haven't budgeted for it Emmy ah

no but I tell you boss I'm pretty

confident about this boss sure I know

you are well it's a great idea let's

Circle back to it at budget time Emmy

but that's nine months from boss so what

else is on your agenda my covers never

got tested if a circle in hell is

reserved for this kind of salesman it's

a pretty darn Pleasant one and despite

myself I never stopped liking the guy

arguments with him never felt like

arguments I would leave his office in a

good mood after losing every point and

he was the one who did all the conceding

you'll find much the same technique if

you take a class in improv your teachers

will almost certainly School you in the

practice of yes and dot dot dot and quad

this entails accepting what the other

person says in building on it imagine

yourself on stage with a partner she

starts partner look the penguins are

taking off from our roof so how do you

respond sensibly you they can't be

penguins penguins can't fly plus we live

in Florida did you mean Pelicans you can

just hear the break squealing on that

little dialogue let's try a yes and

instead you yes and it makes me so glad

we built that catapult on top of our

Igloo the cool thing about this

improvisational method is that it lets

you nudge the conversation in a

direction you want suppose you disagree

that penguins are flying off your roof

instead of pointing out that Penguins

don't fly simply assume a catapult

aren't we being agreeable while your

conversations probably won't take such

avian Flights of Fancy the same approach

can work in a political argument

politics makes an excellent test of

concession in part because the tactic is

so refreshing see if you can go through

an entire discussion without overtly

disagreeing with your opponent she I'm

willing to give up a little privacy so

the government can keep me safe you

safety is important she not that they're

going to tap my phone you no you'd never

Rock the Boat she of course I'll speak

up if I disagree with what's going on

you I know you will and let the

government keep a file on you you may

see a little smoke come out of your

friend's ears at this point do not be

alarmed it's simply a natural sign of

mental gears being thrown in reverse the

Greeks loved concession for this very

reason it lets opponents talk their way

right into your corner but there's

something bigger to concession it's a to

what I call agreeability by arguing

without appearing to argue agreeability

takes anger out of Confrontation and it

helps change a fight into an argument

agreeability requires getting inside

your opponent's head you may find that

argumentative brain a pretty messy place

but every head has its attractive Parts

which is the greatest thing about

concession and agreeability ultimately

it's an act of sympathy pathos start

with the audience's mood sympathize

align yourself with your listeners

pathos don't contradict or deny the mood

instead rhetorical sympathy shows its

concern proving as President George H.W

bush put it I care Dot and quad so when

you face that angry man look Stern and

concerned do not shout whoa decaf when a

little girl looks sad sympathy means

looking sad too it does not mean

chirping cheer up this reaction to the

audience's feelings can serve as a

baseline letting them see your own

emotions change as you make your point

Cicero hinted that the great order

transforms himself into an emotional

role model showing the audience how it

should feel little girl I lost my

balloon you aha did you little girl

cries louder you still trying to look

sad while yelling over the crying what's

that you're holding little girl my mom

gave me a dinosaur you cheering up a

dinosaur being a naturally sympathetic

type my wife is especially good at

conceding moods she has a way of playing

my emotion back so intensely that I'm

embarrassed I felt that way I once

returned home from work angry that my

employer had done nothing to recognize

and award my magazine had won Dorothy Sr

not a thing not even a group email

congratulating you Emmy no Dorothy Sr

they have no idea what a good thing they

have in you Emmy well Dorothy Sr an

email wouldn't be enough they should

give you a bonus Emmy it wasn't that big

an award she agreed with me so much that

I found myself siding with my lousy

employer I believe her sympathy was

genuine but its effect was the same as

if she had applied all her rhetorical

skill to make me feel better and I did

feel better if a bit sheepish and then

there's the concession side of ethos

called decorum this is the most

important Jiu Jitsu of all which is why

the whole next chapter is devoted to it

the tools thus use your frog Isaac

Walton says in the complete angler put

your hook through his mouth and out at

his gills and in so doing use him as

though you loved him Dot and quad that

pretty much sums up this chapter which

teaches you to use your audience as

though you loved it all of these tools

require understanding your opponent and

sympathizing with your audience logos

argument by Logic the first logical

tactic we covered was concession using

the opponent's argument to your own

Advantage pathos argument by emotion the

most important pathetic tactic is

sympathy registering concern for your

audience's emotions and then changing

the mood to suit your argument ethos

argument by character Aristotle called

this the most important appeal of all

even more than logos logic emotion and

character are the mega tools of rhetoric

you're about to learn specific ways to

wield each one read on