Etiquette and ethics of the dispute

Sooner or later, any person has to enter into an argument, defending his point of view and refuting the positions of other people. It is important to be able to observe the fine line between energetic discussion and conflict behavior. In addition, a polite and cultured person must avoid even the slightest hint of manipulation or dishonest reception.

Modern etiquette regulates both prepared and accidental (unplanned) disputes. The key rules for each of the disputants are certain norms:

• You can't deviate from the original theme. If the conversation turns to discussing another issue, even a very close one, pay attention to it.
• Immediately indicate those positions on which you agree with your opponent. Point out what you will not accept in any case, what principles you are not going to deviate from. This will help to avoid misunderstandings and many poignant moments.
• Adjust your speech and argument to the level of the other participant and audience, do not try to demonstrate your superiority with complex terms or words unknown to most.
• The ethics of the dispute, of course, prohibits the substitution of concepts or investing in them a different meaning.
• Introduce new arguments one at a time, do not immediately try to bring down a whole "avalanche" of arguments on the other side.

A true culture of controversy means that the disputants admit mistakes that are pointed out to them by an audience or even a principled opponent.

Each argument expressed by one of the participants must be carefully considered, and not simply discarded because of their disagreement, antipathy towards the speaker or ethical beliefs.

This moment is especially important, because by the way a person argues his position and opposes the opinion of others, you can immediately understand:

• how great is his knowledge in general and on the topic under discussion;
• whether he manages to observe the boundary separating simple conviction and assertiveness from rudeness;
• whether the speaker can formulate his position correctly, without offending anyone even in a veiled form;
• whether the thought is expressed clearly, or the speaker himself does not represent the depth of the subject of discussion and cannot fully convey his theses.

In any case, whether it is a business conversation, an academic debate, a television discussion or an argument with family members, it is desirable to use simple and precisely formulated thoughts. So it will be more difficult for the opponent in the dispute to turn them in a favorable direction for themselves or switch the discussion to another topic.

Do not say anything you are not 100% sure of, even if you really need arguments in defense of a weak position. As a last resort, immediately clarify that you are only putting forward an opinion, an assumption, or information that has not been fully verified.

The rules of the dispute imply, among other things, that the statements of the opponent must first be refuted (or partially accepted), and only then one can develop one's own thought.One or two expressive and strong arguments will win the argument rather than a dozen dull proofs, half of which, moreover, will say little even to specialists who do not delve into the analysis of the discussion.

If a solution is proposed that you do not like, you must first focus on its advantages and strengths. Only then can you point out vulnerabilities and negative consequences.

Some secrets of "black rhetoric" and manipulation in the dispute, see the video below.