How to argue well and win debates: 10 very useful strategies

Arguing, that is, defending beliefs or opinions in a more or less convincing way is, certainly, something common in social interaction.

In all kinds of contexts and fields, such as the media, scientific forums, chats with friends, or even speeches Parliamentarians frequently generate debates in which reasons are given and asked to defend a specific action or a specific position.

That is why it is so important to know how to argue correctly because, in addition to being a daily action, it is necessary to know how to explain one's own point of view in an infinite number of situations, in which, if we manage to convince others, it can imply benefits.

• Recommended article: "The 10 types of arguments to use in debates and discussions"

Let's take a closer look at the importance of knowing how to argue well, in addition to learning how to do it in the most correct way.

The importance of knowing how to argue

Arguing is a very common action in life in society. This type of action plays a very important role when relating to other people, given that, one could say, that every time you talk to someone, at some point or other in the conversation something will be said that is intended not merely to inform, but also to get the other person to agree with what saying.

For example, being on the street with friends, the question may arise as to which is the best restaurant to go to for dinner. Although this situation can be considered trivial, the member of the group who can best explain why they should go to their favorite restaurant can exercise not only the ability to influence the decisions of other colleagues, but also acquires a role of certain dominance over they.

Knowing how to argue well becomes extremely necessary when talking about the world of work and the academic environment. To say that there are more and more companies and universities that value knowing how to argue as a requirement is lying, because it has practically always been taken as a necessary competence both in the workplace and in the academic.

For example, a student who carries out research but does not know how to properly defend it in his final degree project runs the risk of getting a bad grade. On the other hand, the car salesman who doesn't know how to convince the customer to buy the latest car on the market risks losing his job.

But knowing how to argue is not limited only to knowing how to say what one thinks of a specific topic or exerting some kind of influence on who is addressed. It is not a merely oral or written task. A person who knows how to argue well is not only a good communicator. It is also one that takes into account the context in which the communicative action takes place, thinks about the level and feelings of the public with whom he speaks, empathizing to a greater or lesser extent with him. He also takes into account the behavior of other people, whether or not they are adversaries in the debate, knowing if they agree or disagree with what has been said.

Tips to argue correctly

Once the importance of knowing how to argue well is understood, let's see some guidelines that serve to make the argumentative action satisfactory.

1. prepare well

The ability to know how to argue can be improved through practice, but, for this, It is very necessary to document in depth on the topic you want to talk about.

Whatever the opinion regarding the topic of the debate, it does not make much sense to defend it without first having seen the related facts.

Nowadays many people give their opinion without knowing what they are talking about and, although convinced that they are right, at the moment in which try to argue their beliefs, all they get to do is ridicule by demonstrating their complete ignorance about the issue.

Avoiding this error is as simple as going to reliable sources of information that, through data objectives, the opinion of experts and scientific knowledge of the subject, will allow us to make more solid our stance.

2. present the argument

Beginning with an explanation in which you present what is going to be argued is a very good way to start the debate or speech.

This introduction will include the premise or thesis, allowing the public to get a general idea of ​​what is going to be discussed and the position that is going to be defended.

In essence, this introduction summarizes what has been known through the own research that has been carried out.

3. Present the evidence from most to least robust

A good strategy to defend your own point of view is to show the data based on its degree of solidity., preferring to go from more to less.

First, we start with the most compelling piece of evidence, with the intention of building support for our position from the public early on.

Progressively, those weaker aspects of our point of view are presented, although this is no longer of great importance to the public, since we have already managed to get support.

4. Decide the type of reasoning used

It is very important that, on the way to reach the final conclusion during the debate, the way in which one's own point of view will be rationally defended is chosen.

You can opt for deductive reasoning, which starts from generalizations to reach a specific conclusion. Using this type of reasoning, if the starting premises are true, then the conclusion would also have to be true. For example:

‘All plants need water. Ficuses are plants. The ficuses need water.’

On the other hand, you can also use inductive reasoning., with which she begins with the most specific aspects, reaching a more general conclusion later. For example:

‘María ate chocolate and she felt bad. Paula ate chocolate and felt bad. Then chocolate will make you feel bad.’

In inductive thinking, if the premises are true, the conclusion may or may not be true.. This type of reasoning is used in those cases in which it is required to make predictions rather than arguments.

5. Do not repeat yourself more than necessary

There is no better argument for repeating the same thing over and over again, nor for extending it with a stream of words that the only thing it achieves is to make the public dizzy.

If the speech or manifesto is excessively long, the chances of making mistakes and getting bored increase.

6. Strive to understand the adversary

In case you are in an oral debate or any other type of situation of this type, you should make an effort to try to understand the rival position.

This does not mean that the position of the other should be supported, of course, but Yes, you should try to see the points that they have explained and based on what sources they rely on.

Once the other's point of view is understood, it is easier to defend one's own position with greater success, especially all because misunderstandings and arguing about aspects that the other side has not really saying.

It is very frequent in debates that situations occur in which, while a person makes a criticism of what the adversary explained, this adversary jumps saying something like "I did not say this" and, finally, it turns out that obviously I had not said such a thing, which implies that all the criticism made collapses like a castle of playing cards

7. Let talk and admit mistakes

Especially in oral debates, it is very important to let the other side explain themselves, without interrupting them while doing so.

Also, it is very important that, in case another side has said a demonstrable and solid truth, it is accepted.

Denying the facts, in addition to being synonymous with lying, can be perceived as stubbornness and can do more harm than good for one's position, since It can make the public, seeing that one of the data that we have exposed is false, the rest also runs the risk of being false and we could be refusing to it.

Denying the facts when they have been seen to be what they are can be perceived as stubbornness and not accepting reality. This harms one's own position, since it can imply that the rest of the data that we have obtained could be false or we have not been able to see how they really were.

To make matters worse, the discussion can reach a point where it becomes difficult or impossible to continue it, with one side saying a certain fact while the other refuses to believe it.

8. The sense of humor in its proper measure

It may seem like a no-brainer, but although humor can be a good argumentative tool, you must know how to use it at the right time.

Jokes, especially in a relaxed context and when talking about something everyday, are fine. They are not so when it comes to more serious issues like climate change, feminism, political prisoners or genocide.

To find out if it's really appropriate to make a joke about the topic you're talking about, it's as simple as how to have a minimum of empathy and put yourself in the place of the person to whom it is directed or with whom the humor.

9. Avoid ad hominem fallacies

The ad hominem fallacy, in Latin 'against man', is a type of (bad) argument used with much frequently both in mundane discussions and in those that should be on a higher level, such as in the policy.

It basically consists of criticizing the adversary for the way he is rather than for his arguments. or data that you have exposed.

Criticize the person based on their gender, race, sexual orientation, appearance, among others, instead of giving solidity to own arguments, it will help the public see us as sore losers or people who do not know how to keep the composure.

• We recommend you read: "The 10 types of logical and argumentative fallacies"

10. Adapt the language to the level of the opponent

If you have done a thorough search for information on the topic to be discussed, it is very probable that specialized terms are known, great reference authors, among other very useful data.

However, one should not bombard the person the argument is addressed with a lot of words in order to make known how much is known about the subject.

This can lead to a series of drawbacks that, of course, do not help to convince others of our position.

It can be perceived that one takes refuge in having memorized a lot of words without knowing how to use them or nor to relate them to the main objective of the intervention, which is to argue the position own.

It can also give you the feeling that you are beating around the bush, getting away from the main point of the discussion. You can talk about issues related to the main topic of the debate, but you must take into account what the reference point is.

On the other hand, and to make sure that the opponent understands us clearly, it is appropriate to adapt the language used to his level. Not in a paternalistic act, but rather with the intention that he does not misinterpret what we are saying or that misunderstandings occur.

Bibliographic references:

• Anscombe, J. c. and Ducrot, O.: (1991) Argumentation in language. Gredos, Madrid.
• Grice, H. Q.: (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
• Johnson, R. H.: (2000). Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Mahwah.
• Vega, L.: (2003). If it's about arguing. Montesinos, Barcelona