Sunday Levity: An exercise for you, the reader

Let’s play spot the argument

Schopenhauer’s “Thirty-Eight Ways to Win an Argument” is an excellent reference for those seeking to make, prove or defend a point.

Here’s an exercise that will prove to be educative, informative and entertaining — go through this discussion and see how many Schopenhauer techniques you can spot.

18th June 2006 – 10:29 | By Nitin Pai | Posted in Aside | Comments (10)

10 Comments

  • confused wrote:
    18th June 2006 at 10:39

    Nitin,

    Thanks for the link.

    How many did you spot? :)

  • confused wrote:
    18th June 2006 at 10:49

    And yes, whom would you ‘blame’ for using these tecniques? Feel free to give a honest opinion, no offense would be taken. :)

    cheers

  • Nitin wrote:
    18th June 2006 at 12:55

    Confused,

    I stopped counting at 15 :-) As for who employed one or more of these techniques? Almost everyone. That’s what makes this exercise so entertaining. With regards to the debate itself, there’s one technique that Schopenhauer didn’t point out, but remains very important: Don’t try to convince the opposition, try to convince the audience.

  • Apollo wrote:
    18th June 2006 at 13:13

    thanks for the link nitin. i’am having a sense of deja vu reading this list. looks like our commie comrades, islamist apologists and islamic fundamentalists use these techniques very often. Thanks for exposing their secrets. maybe now we can turn the tables upon them.

  • anon wrote:
    18th June 2006 at 14:20

    39th one: when your opponent seems like he’s winning the argument, show him the list with 38 entries and allege that he is using some of those techniques. :=)

  • Bombay Addict wrote:
    18th June 2006 at 15:41

    Very, very useful. Thank you. And ah yes, am an admirer of your blog. Missed out on meeting you at the last bloggers meet and hope to do so next time.

  • Life is a street car named Desire » Why We Must Sing Vande Mataram wrote:
    19th June 2006 at 10:45

    [...] Update 2- Dhoomketu fisks my piece here, Dilip defends his postition here and here, Nitin pours scorn on all arguments made in the comment section hereand Reflextion clarifies his position here.   [...]

  • Gaurav wrote:
    19th June 2006 at 15:32

    Nitin,

    Reading the post you linked to I realized that I employed all the techniques.
    It is a distinction methinks (even if a dubious one :-) )

    Regards

  • Nitin wrote:
    19th June 2006 at 16:36

    Confused (re the trackback from Life is a street car named Desire),

    I would describe what I poured as scorn. Just that the discussion provides for an entertaining (and educative) time for anyone wanting to practice argumentation. It’s meant to be taken lightly.

  • confused wrote:
    20th June 2006 at 05:29

    Nitin,

    Sorry! Wrong choice of words on my part. I have changed it to an educative and entertaining scheme. Please free to edit the trackback suitably.