Thursday, February 22, 2007


Sometimes you need to avoid the argument to win. I know that may mean that you don’t win the current argument, but you have to consider your overall record. You need to remember that some people will actually kill you for being a winner or even starting an argument with them. I know that it puts a huge damper on your day if you don’t get to argue (especially if you belong to the “Total Jackass” school of debate), but you have to think of the big picture, there are many others out there waiting to engage you in verbal fisticuffs. Are you going to take away their joy because you want to match wits with a knife, gun or kick to the head?

Remember, no matter what your specific aim is, to teach, preach, or terrorize, argument is about destruction. You certainly can’t teach someone anything new until you have extinguished their hopes, banished their dreams, pulverized their expectations, subverted the foundations of their deeply held beliefs and deconstructed the psychological artifice that keeps them from listening to you blindly. Plus, sometimes you need to convince them that obvious truths such as gravity don’t exist (this will be discussed in part 8).

The great thing about my methods is that they are proven true for almost all styles of and motives for argumentation.

Of course there is no point in facing-off with a person who has no intellectual fodder to throw on the mixed metaphorical bonfire of brain-boxing. If you have some dummy throwing mind-feces at you, just let him believe he won, let him have his moment of “glory”, he’ll probably die soon by suffocating on a plastic bag. And when he’s gone, you and the plastic bag can get together and discuss your collective accomplishments.

Being right doesn’t mean you’ll win an argument, in fact, it may even be a hinderance at times. One of the best ways to win an argument is to know all the facts but not tie yourself down to them. This gives you the fluidity you need to assail your foe from any angle. You will sound more credible if you can appear to have an actual viewpoint, but it isn’t usually necessary.

You are probably thinking, “sure, it may be the best way, but I don’t wanna know stuff, I’m just in it for the hard-core noggin-scuffle”. Really, you don’t need to know much more than the fact that you want to argue to get in the game, in fact, that thought you just had, if expressed out loud could be considered an argument!

If you hope to become a professional fussbudget it is best to fact check, fact check, fact check, and to the best of your ability make sure you are always correct (fussbudgetry and pragmatism will be footnoted in part 8).


No comments: