The end goal of any argument is persuasion: one party coming over to the other’s way of thinking – the obvious preference being that it is your opponent that comes to see things your way. The tips and techniques given in this book will give you a considerable edge in achieving this goal, and that will give you quite a bit of power in your interactions and relationships. But to quote Uncle Ben, with great power comes great responsibility, and it is a very valid question to ask whether wielding this influence is right and ethical.
The answer to that question is an ardent but emphatically conditional ‘yes’. The highest good a person can do is act upon their own conscience, and doing so will very often bring you in opposition with others, whether it is having to justify your actions, forging a path through which to move forward or defending your convictions and convincing others to adopt them as well. It is through argument persuasion that superior ideas rise to the top.
The obvious first restriction is that the ideas you are supporting must themselves be truthful, factual and genuinely superior to the best of your knowledge. What this means is that first of all you must strive to understand the issue at hand as completely as possible, seeking out as much information as you can so that you can understand it completely before you even have to defend it to another person. This not only gives you the bonus of complete conviction, but arms you with the opposing arguments so that you can know how best to counter them. Following from this is that when you actually enter into argument you must present your knowledge truthfully – your points should be factual, within the right context, and complete. Do not hide aspects of the argument from your opponent or present partial information, except where absolutely necessary to save time.
Your objective in entering the argument must genuinely be to come to the best conclusion and not simply to ‘win’. Agreeing to a less-than-optimal resolution is a loss for everyone, whereas if you lost the argument due to your opponent being genuinely right then both you and they have actually come away enriched.
Secondly, as has already been mentioned, going in without regard to arriving at the correct outcome is what precipitates the use of underhanded tactics, lying and causes the argument to devolve into an all-out fight. Following on from this is that you actually have to listen to your opponent so that you can actually discern when they have made a valid point. You have to make sure to give your opponent enough time and freedom to make their point and express themselves fully. Avoid any form of coercion or appealing to your authority or power to intimidate your opponent into giving in.
Also very important is that you not tolerate your opponent ignoring or breaching these principles. Call them out immediately if they do so. Allowing them to pass makes it seem as if that sort of thing is acceptable – and maybe you do it as well – and really hinders the attempt at getting to the truth.
It is true, though, that sometimes a breach of these protocols is justified. Sometimes urgency is absolutely essential and a quick resolution is more important than arriving at a logically derived conclusion. It is possible that you have pertinent information about the issue that your opponent does not have and not enough time to adequately share it. There may be restrictions to the sharing of information and you might have to resort to using your authority or giving purposely false or faulty reasoning to convince your opponent.
There is also the possibility that there is a higher objective than the truth. A great example of this that parents will come across is whether to make your children believe in Santa Claus. Of course Santa doesn’t exist, but the joy and mystery that the belief in him provides children is often more than enough to make it worth it to many parents. To top that off, the process of beginning to question the existence of Santa and eventually come to shake off that belief can be a good exercise in helping children develop their faculty of critical thinking.
Such situations where suspending the ethical guidelines to good argumentation are very few and far between. As a general rule, it is far better to err on the side of using sound reasoning and good techniques, because they have a far better chance of convincing your opponents anyway. People don’t like to be made fools of or to be looked on without respect, and using underhanded tactics is definitely a signifier of that. Being called out on arguing unethically can quite heavily damage your reputation with your opponent and call into question all your other arguments.
In conclusion, you owe it to your opponent, yourself and the general concept of truth to formulate your arguments ethically and logically. Remaining within the principles of good argumentation will ensure that you have the best opportunity at changing minds and at arriving at the truth.
