You’re wrong, I’m right!
Who doesn’t like a good argument?
Well, my dad for one. I remember if a discussion got protracted or heated at home, he’d chime in with, “Fight. Fight. We hate peace.” That was his signal that he had heard enough, and that we should desist. We usually did.
That’s kind of funny though, since in later years, he became a municipal councillor, and nobody argues more than politicians. Mind you, council is not quite so argumentative as are the provincial governments and the federal government.
The fact that our governments are based on an adversarial model should tell you something about our culture. Of course, argument, and its more formal version of debate, are markers of a society where people are free to express their views. This is a good thing.
Argument holds a lot of value, as it presents an opportunity for people of different views to discuss the merits of their beliefs, in attempts to sway the thinking of the other party or parties. This can frequently generate new thoughts on a topic. Such revelations derived from argument can determine new courses of action, or further spawn other new ideas.
As an example of this, I frequently receive feedback from my readers on topics about which I have written, and while I value all feedback, I actually enjoy the feedback from the people who disagree with me the most. On occasion, I’ve altered my beliefs to incorporate new truths that I found in what other people had to say.
As I’ve said before, not all people are created equal. This statement flies in the face of the politically correct movement that would give value to the beliefs of all persons. Nevertheless, there it is.
There are perfectly intelligent people who should not engage in active argument, as their skill set does not allow them the active back and forth pace at which arguments can proceed. There are others who can contribute nothing beyond repeating the rhetoric of the day. These folks aren’t worth listening to. There are others who have little knowledge of the topic under discussion, but they feel like they still have something to contribute. These folks would be better off sitting on the sidelines and just listening, as they might learn something. As Kenny Rogers said, “You got to know when to hold them, and know when to fold them.”
Arguing well is a goal of governing parties, but it’s not enough to argue well; they must argue and win. Most people like winners, especially voters. The issue becomes, what does it mean to be a winner in an argument?
Frequently, depending on the mandate of the governing party, winning means an improved economy and creating new jobs. That certainly sounds like a win. What if though, those wins come at the potential expense of, let’s say, the environment, as in recent decisions to permit the further development of Alton Gas or the burning of used tires for fuel at Lafarge Canada in Brookfield. Living as I do smack dab between these two controversial projects, I can’t say that the Liberal government has winning arguments!
However, I digress. As a person who loves a good argument, let me share a few things that I’ve learned about argument over the years. First, never bring emotion into an argument. If you do, you’ve already lost. Second, feel free to inject humour into a serious discussion. It has the positive results of reducing tensions, throwing your opponents off guard, and is often a prelude to you getting your win. A third suggestion is that if you’re looking to bring an argument to an end, find your opponents’ emotional buttons and push them, hard.
Arguments can take place over serious issues and trivial ones, but whatever you do, try to enjoy the experience of the free-flowing exchange of ideas and beliefs.