Etiquette and ethics of the dispute

Sooner or later, any person has to enter into a dispute, defending their point of view and refuting the positions of other people. It is important to be able to keep a thin line between energetic discussion and conflictual behavior. In addition, a polite and cultured person is obliged to avoid even the slightest hint of manipulation or dishonest reception.

Modern etiquette regulates both prepared and accidental (unplanned) disputes. The key rules for each of the disputants are certain rules:

• You can not shy away from the original topic. If the conversation turns to a discussion of another problem, even a very close one, pay attention to it.
• Immediately identify the positions on which you agree with the opponent. Point out what you will not accept in any case what principles you are not going to deviate from. This will help avoid misunderstandings and many critical moments.
• Adjust your speech and argument to the level of another participant and audience, do not try to demonstrate your superiority with the help of complex terms or words unknown to most of them.
• The ethics of the dispute, of course, prohibits replacing concepts or investing in them a different meaning.
• Introduce new arguments one by one, do not try to immediately bring down on the other side a whole “avalanche” of arguments.

The true culture of controversy implies that the disputants admit mistakes, which are indicated by the audience or even the principal opponent.

Every argument expressed by one of the participants should be carefully considered, and not simply discarded because of their disagreement, antipathy towards the speaker or ethical beliefs.

This moment is especially important, because by the way a person argues his position and opposes the opinion of others, Immediately you can understand:

• how great is his knowledge in general and on the subject under discussion;
• whether he manages to keep the line separating simple conviction and assertiveness from rudeness;
• whether the speaker can formulate his position correctly, without offending anyone even in a veiled form;
• whether a thought is expressed clearly, or the speaker himself does not represent the depth of the subject of discussion and cannot fully convey his theses.

In any case, be it a business conversation, an academic dispute, a discussion on television or a dispute with family members, It is advisable to use simple and accurately formulated thoughts So it will be more difficult for an adversary in a dispute to turn them in the direction advantageous for themselves or to switch the discussion to another topic.

Do not say what you are not 100% sure of, even if you really need arguments to defend a weak position. As a last resort, immediately specify that you are putting forward only an opinion, an assumption, or not fully verified information.

The rules for the conduct of the dispute imply, among other things, that the statements of the opponent must first be refuted (or partially accepted), and only then you can develop your own thought. One or two expressive and strong arguments will make it possible to win the dispute rather than a dozen dim evidence, half of which, moreover, will say little even to specialists who do not go deep into the discussion of the discussion.

If you are offered a solution that you don’t like, you must first focus on its strengths and strengths. Only then can you point out vulnerabilities and negative consequences.

See some of the secrets of "black rhetoric" and manipulation of the dispute in the video below.