DISPUTE - what is it. Why do people argue?

Every conversation involves communication between several people, each of whom has his own idea on the topic under discussion. Often people's opinions on certain issues do not coincide. Such communication may cause an argument. At the same time, an argument between several people does not mean the end of the conversation with a conflict. Simply, each participant in the conversation remains unconvinced.

But there are also disputes that end in conflict, aggravated by mutual resentment and insults. How not to become a participant in such a dispute. After all, for many people, a dispute is an acceptable part of communication, when you can find out the essence of the issue with other people and express your own point of view on this matter.

In order not to find yourself in a whirlpool of conflict caused by a dispute, it is important to understand the necessity of this dispute for yourself.

Dispute - what is it?

During relationships between people, a situation may arise when a common topic of interest to them causes an ambiguous reaction. Different parties have different views on it that differ from others. The opponent, confident that he is right, begins to defend his point of view. A dispute is a reasoned discussion of a subject on which the parties disagree. It differs from simple dialogue in the following ways:

the presence of a clash of opposing opinions;
unwillingness to accept the opponent’s arguments;
a conscious desire to enter into conflict;
the desire to prove oneself right at any cost.

Why do people argue?

A person who argues, consciously or not, sets certain goals for himself. The reasons for the dispute may be as follows:

To establish the truth . Such a dispute is considered the highest form of its manifestation. Under certain conditions it can be enjoyable. During a verbal confrontation, opponents can show the best qualities of their minds.
To convince your opponent . One side is sincerely convinced that it is right. She thinks that if she convinces her opponent of this, she will bring him good. Another case is related to the desire to deceive the interlocutor. The counterpart himself does not believe in what he is trying to convince the enemy of.
To achieve victory over your opponent . What is an argument in this case, if not self-affirmation over another person. Winning brings a feeling of false self-satisfaction and vanity. He raises the importance of himself in his own eyes.
Just to argue . There is a category of people who like to hurt others. The dispute here acts as an additional opportunity to “let off steam.” An argumentative person does not know how to use his energy for creative activities.

Dispute

Insistent desire to change another

Most people tend to think that their partner is the problem; they think that if they can get them to change, things will be much better for both of them. Therefore, the focus is on pushing the other to change - “You need to control yourself,” “Stop being a slob,” and so on.

While concerns may be valid, it often gets lost in the heat of argument. Another person only hears criticism addressed to him, feeling like he is being pressured. Don't force it: try to talk rationally about how you want your partner to be, choosing the right time for the conversation.

Types of dispute

Conflicts of different opinions can take several forms. The following types of dispute are distinguished:

Discussion . Its goal is to find an acceptable solution to a controversial issue by comparing different opinions on the topic.
Dispute . It is prepared in advance and carried out according to previously established rules. Common topics for discussion are selected from the scientific, social, social, moral and ethical areas.
Debate (debate) . They arise during the discussion of a central issue at meetings of a certain community of people.
Dispute-eclecticism . It differs from other types of dispute by the possibility of using not entirely correct techniques.
Dispute-controversy . Discussion of problems takes place in an acute form, both in person and in absentia. A feature of this type of dispute is the struggle of fundamentally opposing views.
Dispute-sophistry . This is a dispute using the method of substitution of concepts. During reasoning, the laws of logic are used to deceive the interlocutor.

See also: PRIDE - what is it. Positive and negative sides

Dispute-discussion

In the public sphere, it is carried out under the leadership of a specially appointed facilitator, who directs the course of the event in the right direction. The essence of the discussion is to discuss opinions in order to find an acceptable result. At the end of this activity, the views of those gathered on the topic under consideration may remain unchanged. However, they may be taken into account when making the final conclusion. During the discussion, only correct techniques are allowed. The event will be successful if all participants agree with the achieved result.

Dispute-controversy

This word means "warlike" in Greek. Figuratively speaking, entering into a debate means declaring war on your opponent. Its goal is to defend its correct position in every possible way and destroy the false views of its opponent. The questions raised in the battles of this type of dispute can be philosophical, political, or artistic in nature. A number of examples of contemporary controversy can be given:

television talk shows;
comments on sensitive articles and publications;
discussing topics on forums and blogs.

Dispute-eclecticism

This term denotes an artificial mixture of heterogeneous ideas, meanings, and concepts. They are not related to each other in any way, and in some cases they can be directly opposite. Defending your opinion using eclecticism means bombarding your opponent with a mass of meaningless arguments, one of which can immediately refute the previous argument. In this type of dispute, the main thing is the pressure and onslaught of argumentation. The opponent must become obscured and lose the meaning of his arguments in the stream of nonsense that has befallen him from the opponent.

Argument-sophistry

It is based on the ability to reason to the detriment of meaning. In this type of dispute, the main thing is to build a logically correct chain of arguments and present it convincingly. Reasoning and persuasiveness are the main tricks of the sophists’ argument. The laws of logic here are intended to confuse the opponent by substituting the meanings and concepts of well-known terms. As a result, in the right words, a sophist debater can give directly opposite meanings and turn the content of what was said “upside down.” Using a logical trick, he passes off a deliberately distorted erroneous reasoning as the truth.

I bet on the moon!

0
In 1960, an Englishman named David Threlfall walked into a bookmaker's office with the goal of earning “a penny of nickels,” in other words, betting a relatively small amount on a risky venture that had at least a small chance of winning (and, as a result, decent dividends). The English love to bet. The list of bets that could be made with the office included such incredible things as the likelihood that in the near future people will learn to turn water into wine, the creation of anti-gravity, and much more. And David liked the bet most of all, according to the terms of which people will land on the moon in the next 10 years. The bet was very attractive - 1 in 1000, and David boldly bet £10 on this opportunity. Nine years later, just at the moment when Neil Armstrong, standing on the surface of our planet’s satellite, uttered his historical words, the bookmaker, sighing sadly, paid lucky David 10 thousand pounds, for which he immediately bought a luxury sports car. But there is no good without bad. Not even a year old, David Threlfall crashed to death in his sports car.

Stages of the dispute

Experts in the field of rhetoric identify five distinct stages of this process:

Confrontation stage . Here the degree of discrepancy in views on the subject of the dispute is clarified, and the initial clash of opinions begins.
Discovery stage . This period is characterized by the distribution of roles into opponent and proponent (attacker and defender).
Argumentation stage . This is the time to actively defend your position. The leading role here is played by the proponent.
Criticism stage . If the opponent does not agree with the proponent’s arguments, he begins to give counterarguments and criticize the defender’s position.
Final stage . The level of discussion between the two sides is being assessed. The dispute is resolved in favor of the winning participant.

How to argue?

Psychologists advise avoiding arguments on any occasion. If the formation of a dispute cannot be avoided, you need to know how to handle it:

There is no need to deliberately provoke an aggravation of the situation.
It is recommended to find out in more detail the opinion of the interlocutor on the subject of the dispute.
Let your opponent know that his views are respected.
During the dispute, it is necessary to maintain a restrained style of behavior.
When conducting a discussion, it is useful to provide precise and unambiguous definitions.
When victory is won, you need to thank your opponent for a worthy fight. Under no circumstances should you be ostentatiously proud of your win and humiliate your opponent.

See also: CHARISMA - what is it in simple words. Charisma Development

Dispute rules

If this process is not controlled, it can create a conflict situation. There is a possibility of destroying the harmony of interpersonal relationships and leaving an unpleasant aftertaste in the soul. The art of argument is based on certain rules:

You need to avoid provocative phrases like “You’re wrong.” This is a direct message to the opponent’s incompetence. It humiliates a person's self-esteem.
It is recommended to first listen to another point of view. You need to let the person speak without interrupting him.
With the most convincing argumentation, you can give the enemy a way to retreat. Otherwise, he will enter into open confrontation.
It is recommended to strictly avoid direct insults, saving the opponent’s face. You must, under any circumstances, try to remain on good terms.
The terms of the dispute should relate only to the subject of difference of opinion, without affecting the individual.
There is no need to speculate and interpret false meanings of words. If any ambiguities arise, it is recommended to clarify all unclear points with your opponent.

How to win an argument?

It is recommended to build certain tactics leading to victory. You can use the following arguments in a dispute to win:

In a conversation, you should arrange your arguments from the strongest (he will prove you right faster) to the weaker.
It is necessary to immediately warn your opponent’s possible arguments. Then he will have nothing to “cover” with.
It is better to base your defense of your arguments on identifying inaccuracies in the details of the opposing side’s position.
It will be useful to strengthen your argument with a third party.
The enemy’s vigilance can be “lulled to sleep” by telling him a few compliments.
You cannot use “empty” arguments that are not supported by facts. What kind of dispute is it if there is no evidence in it?
You should always leave the last word for yourself, hiding a “trump card” up your sleeve.
You can introduce special techniques from the psychology of communication. These are phrases like “as you well know.”

Small bonus

In conclusion, I would like to outline the debates that have reached the level of the global scientific community and have influenced the lives of each of us:

Thomas Huxley and Samuel Wilberforce regarding Charles Darwin's theory.
Alfred Wegener against everyone (dispute regarding the existence of one supercontinent Pangea).
War of currents between Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla (direct and alternating current).

Dale Carnegie once remarked: “Be able to take the other person’s position and understand what he needs, not you. The whole world will be with the one who can do this.” In our opinion, relying on the opinion of a psychologist, the author of the concept of conflict-free communication, a speaker and a teacher is more than advisable. Of course, we will not argue if your position differs from the one presented by us, because we understand you, respect your point of view, accept the presence of differing views - after all, this is the key to success.

We wish you good luck!