Continuation of MiauMiau und WauWau (1)
MiauMiau and WauWau (2)!
What is it like if one out of two thinks “MiauMiau” and the other one thinks “WauWau”? How do we handle the fact that we feel we alone possess the ultimate truth and also have the pressing urge to relate it to other people? Or, even worse, to convince them that this certainty is the one and only truth? Or, the other way around: how to handle people who want to convert us into believers of their singular truth?
A short time ago, a friend of mine sent me the following comment:
As far as “truth”, or what we hold to be truth, is concerned, I once read that you have two options: either you offer it to the person you are talking to like a coat he can comfortably wrap around himself – or you can throw it around his face like a wet towel.
The first method will certainly be the one with more chances of success. And it might be more prudence and self-discipline than cowardice to sometimes be a little reserved.
Well, I am sure he is correct. All too often, some well-meaning (or even evil-meaning) people throw their alleged truth into our faces like a wet towel. And, of course, the coat method would certainly be better. What a nice concept.
But there is also a mechanism you can learn in order to protect yourself against the “wet towel”. You must refrain from immediately throwing your own, perhaps even harder “wet towel” back into the face of your opponent. That would be the wrong way and totally unproductive. The only possible result would be a battle of towels.
Instead, you should try to make the “certainty” of the person you are having a discussion with – which is absolutely contrary to your belief – your own. Why not follow a dialectic trick and ask yourself:
What requirements must be met to make the other person’s opinion my own?
With this kind of idea, you will manage to:
- find such stupid requirements that they will be excellent arguments against the other person’s certitude, so we will easily be able to counter it
and/or - discover that maybe the “alien, wet towel” was not all that stupid and we might consider re-evaluating
🙂 now I almost wrote “re-knowing”.
The first aspect improves your own position by giving you better arguments, the second helps you to re-think your position and probably change it. Both is valuable and will be helpful in any conversation, debate, discussion or when preparing a presentation – or even just when socializing.
Thus, you can also practice your rhetorical competence and improve your “social intelligence”.
Why don’t you try this little dialectic trick? You could, for example write an article proving a totally stupid thesis in a seductive and at first sight correct, but logically totally wrong way.
RMD
(Translated by EG)
Loading ...