ADVERTISEMENT

Steel Man the Opposing Argument

ChrisKnight06

Todd's Tiki Bar
Gold Member
Nov 30, 2005
33,615
17,670
113
I picked up this concept on a few pods I listen to and I love it. Does anyone here attempt to do that? I think one of the most frustrating things is a lack of even attempting to accurately frame the argument your opponent is making. Everyone arguing a point the other side isn't even actually making.

https://constantrenewal.com/steel-man/
 
I picked up this concept on a few pods I listen to and I love it. Does anyone here attempt to do that? I think one of the most frustrating things is a lack of even attempting to accurately frame the argument your opponent is making. Everyone arguing a point the other side isn't even actually making.

https://constantrenewal.com/steel-man/
Depends on the situation. You're pretty rational so if I was debating with you, yeah. With some other people, sometimes being provocative is the only way to get them out of their echo chamber. Other times, its just fun to banter because its meaningless.
 
I picked up this concept on a few pods I listen to and I love it. Does anyone here attempt to do that? I think one of the most frustrating things is a lack of even attempting to accurately frame the argument your opponent is making. Everyone arguing a point the other side isn't even actually making.

https://constantrenewal.com/steel-man/

Never saw it described like that but yea I absolutely try to do that. If I think someone is persuadable, then I try to disarm them first. Empathy is key. If you wont' make an effort to try to understand the world through their eyes then you can't persuade.

Most people's political views become part of their identity. That means an attack on their views feels like a personal attack. As long as those defensive walls are up, nothing you say - no matter how "right" or logical it is - will get through.

Most partisan types have a really hard time accepting any analysis as "non-partisan". Confirmation bias causes them to prop up any argument they agree with, and partisanship allows them to discount any argument they disagree with because "clearly the author has an agenda."

As soon as you give evidence to confirm that you are a partisan, you're done. Your opinion is in the trash. So you have to reach for some common ground first. Try to understand and re-affirm parts of their argument. In other words, try to LEARN from them, no matter how wrong you're convinced they are.

A sort of internal Devil's Advocate works well. Don't make your goal to change their mind, try to change your own mind to their position. As you add layers of logic and reason to their less-rational partisan position, there's a good chance they come along with you part of the way. You've built up a much more defensible argument on their side but as a result they've been pulled a little closer to the center. You may also discover that your position is not as well defined as you thought going in.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Crazyhole
Never saw it described like that but yea I absolutely try to do that. If I think someone is persuadable, then I try to disarm them first. Empathy is key. If you wont' make an effort to try to understand the world through their eyes then you can't persuade.

Most people's political views become part of their identity. That means an attack on their views feels like a personal attack. As long as those defensive walls are up, nothing you say - no matter how "right" or logical it is - will get through.

Most partisan types have a really hard time accepting any analysis as "non-partisan". Confirmation bias causes them to prop up any argument they agree with, and partisanship allows them to discount any argument they disagree with because "clearly the author has an agenda."

As soon as you give evidence to confirm that you are a partisan, you're done. You're opinion is in the trash. So you have to reach for some common ground first. Try to understand and re-affirm parts of their argument. In other words, try to LEARN from them, no matter how wrong you're convinced they are.

A sort of internal Devil's Advocate works well. Don't make your goal to change their mind, try to change your own mind to their position. As you add layers of logic and reason to their less-rational partisan position, there's a good chance they come along with you part of the way. You've built up a much more defensible argument on their side but as a result they've been pulled a little closer to the center. You may also discover that your position is not as well defined as you thought going in.
10/10.
 
Never saw it described like that but yea I absolutely try to do that. If I think someone is persuadable, then I try to disarm them first. Empathy is key. If you wont' make an effort to try to understand the world through their eyes then you can't persuade.

Most people's political views become part of their identity. That means an attack on their views feels like a personal attack. As long as those defensive walls are up, nothing you say - no matter how "right" or logical it is - will get through.

Most partisan types have a really hard time accepting any analysis as "non-partisan". Confirmation bias causes them to prop up any argument they agree with, and partisanship allows them to discount any argument they disagree with because "clearly the author has an agenda."

As soon as you give evidence to confirm that you are a partisan, you're done. Your opinion is in the trash. So you have to reach for some common ground first. Try to understand and re-affirm parts of their argument. In other words, try to LEARN from them, no matter how wrong you're convinced they are.

A sort of internal Devil's Advocate works well. Don't make your goal to change their mind, try to change your own mind to their position. As you add layers of logic and reason to their less-rational partisan position, there's a good chance they come along with you part of the way. You've built up a much more defensible argument on their side but as a result they've been pulled a little closer to the center. You may also discover that your position is not as well defined as you thought going in.

I actually thought about tagging you specifically b/c I recognize you doing it. The Berenson thread is a great example.
 
I actually thought about tagging you specifically b/c I recognize you doing it. The Berenson thread is a great example.

Ha! Yea - I try!

I also keep in mind that the person on a message board you're replying to may not be persuadable. But for every poster there's like 10 or 20 lurkers - lots of times that's the audience you might be having some influence on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChrisKnight06
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT