Read on Twitter
How to win an argument without having the argument
A dark thread that should be illegal
A dark thread that should be illegal
Disclaimer:
As in the previous thread (see below), this will not show you how to convince your interlocutor but rather convince the audience.
The person you do this against will hate you for the rest of their lives, use it with caution. https://twitter.com/EgoDriv/status/1507326444149645316?s=20&t=AlT96k_6y5MOtShAZ-g2ZQ
As in the previous thread (see below), this will not show you how to convince your interlocutor but rather convince the audience.
The person you do this against will hate you for the rest of their lives, use it with caution. https://twitter.com/EgoDriv/status/1507326444149645316?s=20&t=AlT96k_6y5MOtShAZ-g2ZQ
Once Again:
The reason I'm sharing this with you is to allow you to spot this rhetoric tactic and not fall for it.
I am not inviting you to use such deceptive conversation techniques.
Let's get started.
The reason I'm sharing this with you is to allow you to spot this rhetoric tactic and not fall for it.
I am not inviting you to use such deceptive conversation techniques.
Let's get started.
Step Zero: The Before
This thread concerns an ideological debate, for it to be successful, you need to know every negative thing about the person you're talking to.
What you will do is prevent the ideas from being debated and focus on details and logical fallacies.
This thread concerns an ideological debate, for it to be successful, you need to know every negative thing about the person you're talking to.
What you will do is prevent the ideas from being debated and focus on details and logical fallacies.
On the other hand, you need to be ready for any personal attack, for that will inevitably happen. Don't worry we got a solution for that too.
Simply make sure your interlocutor starts talking first, and stay silent until they do.
Important for the rest.
Keep reading.
Simply make sure your interlocutor starts talking first, and stay silent until they do.
Important for the rest.
Keep reading.
Step 1: Destroying the Debate
If you plan on winning the argument without even debating; the most important thing to start with is hostility.
You don't want the ideas to be brought up; you're here for confrontation.
You want your interlocutor to feel uncomfortable.
If you plan on winning the argument without even debating; the most important thing to start with is hostility.
You don't want the ideas to be brought up; you're here for confrontation.
You want your interlocutor to feel uncomfortable.
To do so, you should start with provocation right from the start.
A good way to do so is by using one of two manipulation techniques:
- Denial of facts: Straight call your interlocutor a liar
- Accusations: Blame everything on your interlocutor's idea
Why?
A good way to do so is by using one of two manipulation techniques:
- Denial of facts: Straight call your interlocutor a liar
- Accusations: Blame everything on your interlocutor's idea
Why?
What Denial and Accusations will do is push your interlocutor to justify themselves.
That basically makes them lose the argument right away
It can take a while to happen but it eventually does no matter how mentally strong the person is
Once that happens, we can move to step 2
That basically makes them lose the argument right away
It can take a while to happen but it eventually does no matter how mentally strong the person is
Once that happens, we can move to step 2
Step 2: Demonize
You've already pushed your interlocutor to justify themselves and their ideas, they are no longer offering solutions, all they are trying to do is prove that they are not liars and that they are genuine.
It's time to call them a manipulator (ironic eh?)
You've already pushed your interlocutor to justify themselves and their ideas, they are no longer offering solutions, all they are trying to do is prove that they are not liars and that they are genuine.
It's time to call them a manipulator (ironic eh?)
As opposed to the previous thread, we jump on the ad hominem quickly here.
The goal is for the debate and argument to never happen.
This will create one of two reactions:
- They get angry: You won
- They keep justifying: Still work to do
The goal is for the debate and argument to never happen.
This will create one of two reactions:
- They get angry: You won
- They keep justifying: Still work to do
Step 3: Fake the Argument
It's time to confuse them.
Bring back the attention to the ideas and debate.
Your goal here is to accuse your interlocutor of going out of topic.
But you don't want them to be on-topic, there is a fine nuance here.
It's time to confuse them.
Bring back the attention to the ideas and debate.
Your goal here is to accuse your interlocutor of going out of topic.
But you don't want them to be on-topic, there is a fine nuance here.
The objective of Step 3, is to make the audience think that your interlocutor is emotional and off-topic
How?
As I said, you redirect the attention of the debate and ideas
YOU do it
As soon as they do too, cancel their argument by reminding that they're liars and manipulators
How?
As I said, you redirect the attention of the debate and ideas
YOU do it
As soon as they do too, cancel their argument by reminding that they're liars and manipulators
It's important not to let your interlocutor debate.
In short, you accuse, deny and put the blame and pressure on the person in front.
Then bring back the conversation to the main topic without allowing them to even express their opinion.
Include things like "Oh you're lying"
In short, you accuse, deny and put the blame and pressure on the person in front.
Then bring back the conversation to the main topic without allowing them to even express their opinion.
Include things like "Oh you're lying"
What if this is being done to you?
Well I got good and bad news.
The good news is that if you can name their manipulative behavior you put them in a delicate position:
"Sir, that's denial and it's a classic"
Such sentences help destabilize the intelocutor.
Well I got good and bad news.
The good news is that if you can name their manipulative behavior you put them in a delicate position:
"Sir, that's denial and it's a classic"
Such sentences help destabilize the intelocutor.
The Bad news:
Unless you know exactly what manipulative techniques are and how they are used, you probably won't see it happen and let the emotions dig your own grave.
27.
That's how many modules are in Mental Warfare Strategies.
All you need.
http://mws.crd.co
Unless you know exactly what manipulative techniques are and how they are used, you probably won't see it happen and let the emotions dig your own grave.
27.
That's how many modules are in Mental Warfare Strategies.
All you need.
http://mws.crd.co
I repeat:
If you want to win an argument without having it, make the person justifying themselves and don't let them express proper ideas
Use Denial and Accusing to frame the conversation in a way that suits you
Make them look emotional
Only let them talk if they're off-topic
If you want to win an argument without having it, make the person justifying themselves and don't let them express proper ideas
Use Denial and Accusing to frame the conversation in a way that suits you
Make them look emotional
Only let them talk if they're off-topic
We're done.
If you enjoyed this thread:
1. Follow me @EgoDriv for more of these
2. RT the tweet below to share this thread with your audience https://twitter.com/EgoDriv/status/1529789330033606658
If you enjoyed this thread:
1. Follow me @EgoDriv for more of these
2. RT the tweet below to share this thread with your audience https://twitter.com/EgoDriv/status/1529789330033606658
