It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


5 Reasons Why You Never Need to Win an Argument

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 11:28 PM

Winning an argument is always tempting.

Who doesn’t want to be right? Have the last word? Be the sharpest and smartest with their words?

Be victorious!

1. You can never technically “win”

Presidential debates stir up the media, and people love to vote on which candidate performed better. But in the end, neither candidate wins — because there are no judges, no standards, no rules. The country may have voted in one candidate’s favor — but loyal supporters of the opponent will hold strongly to their version of how victory went down. So when you argue with someone and you think you can win or that you have won… think about it more carefully. Even if you make better points and counter each of theirs — that doesn’t mean you’ll convince them that you won. More likely, it means that they’ll get even more upset because you shut them down, or worse — they’ll avoid you, resent you, or be passive aggressive in revenge.

Don't confuse arguing with discussion, I'm sure many of us have been swayed by respectful discussion, its when bickering and arguing commence that one party doesn't ever really "win"

2. Arguing perpetuates conflict

For the same reasons that no one wins an argument, arguing only adds more tension to conflict. If you work well with your emotions and are crafty enough, you can shift arguments into meaningful, intimate, constructive conversations. But most of the time, arguments just turn things into bigger problems and you end up saying what you don’t really mean. You end up miscommunicating your feelings because you decided to use your words as weapons, instead of magic.

I know i have attempted to harm rather then sway before when things get too heated, this is an important rule to remember.

3. The legal system is based on arbitration

Most of time, you can solve your problems with other people directly. For more serious interpersonal disputes, you can hire a lawyer, who’s trained to defend your legal rights. But even then, your lawyer’s not going to war, but to court. Where a jury decides who’s right. Whether or not that jury is “right” is a whole different story. The point is, the jury makes the decision — because it isn’t directly involved in the argument. So the most serious interpersonal disputes are resolved through arbitration, not argument.

4. No one can argue against feelings

Your feelings exist whether or not someone tries to argue them into nonexistence. When someone doesn’t like hearing what you think… and what you feel — let them. They have a right to their own opinion. They have a right to not be considerate of you in that moment. They have a right to only think for themself. They can try to argue against your feelings, by telling you that you shouldn’t have them, you’re being unreasonable, your being illogical or irrational, you’re too sensitive, or you’re overreacting. They can try all they want — but just because they argue doesn’t mean they win (remember #1). What would they win anyway? Completely invalidating you? They can give you cause to feel invalidated by arguing against your feelings. But if you hold your personal boundaries and don’t argue back (simply healthily deflect back), you’ve won. You’ve held your ground. You’ve not let them sway you. It’s when you argue back, by defending your feelings when you never have to… that you let them win.

The thought I get from this one is, don't let your emotions control you in an debate.

5. Trying to control another person’s opinion oversteps both their boundaries and yours

Arguing has one objective: to control, what someone thinks, what they feel, what they should do, what they want, what they need, what’s good for them. You don’t want others controlling you, and you don’t want to control others.
That’s lose-lose for everyone.

Visit the Source for the Full Article

[edit on 12/22/2009 by Alaskan Man]

posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 11:55 PM

Thank you for sharing, will add more after finishing the read

posted on Feb, 25 2010 @ 08:38 PM
I believe I just read the most important thread up to now !!

Do you realise it ?
If people can stick to these rules during a hot debate.

All war would end. World peace.

Thanks !

Sad it is to see so little response on it.

posted on Feb, 25 2010 @ 10:36 PM
I think this thread should be required reading for becoming a member on ATS.
I will try and carry these ideas forward with me in the future.
Thank you. Star and Flag

posted on Feb, 25 2010 @ 11:47 PM
reply to post by Alaskan Man

Also, because a lot of people *read most* will not change their minds no matter what you say or the facts as you percieve them say.

posted on Feb, 26 2010 @ 06:17 AM
I'd be interested to know why you ignored number 5 on the list in your source and replaced it with number 6.

Just curious..

posted on Feb, 26 2010 @ 06:37 AM
reply to post by Alaskan Man

You know what?
That's a really great argument you put forward there...
You win!

posted on Feb, 26 2010 @ 06:56 AM
Great Post!
Made me think about how often arguments can be counter productive when two thick (such as mine) headed individuals collide.

It also reminded me that sometimes the grief is worth it if you can make a change for the better.

I gotta stand up for my beliefs....healthy or not. I call bs when bs is present. Kind of a (non religious) righteous code of ethics.....or curse.

new topics

top topics


log in