Related Posts
Bowl Leader
Best books on leadership and sales skills?
More Posts
Hi All,
I need 11 likes to activate DM. Kindly help.
Additional Posts in Consulting
Who else is working Monday-Thursday this week?
3 types of food to describe your firm?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
how irrational are we talking? can you give an example?
generally speaking, the best way to convince someone in an argument, though i doubt it is even that universally effective, is to acknowledge that the opposing point of view stems from a legitimate concern (it usually does).
put on your consultant hat and paraphrase their concern in your own words to show that you understand and acknowledge their point of view.
for instance, if i’m trying to convince someone of the benefits of universal healthcare, and someone is opposed (this is purely hypothetical), i might begin my argument by saying “i understand your main concern is the significant tax burden proposed in a universal health care system, correct?” assuming this is the case, once they agree, i can begin sharing why i think that is not as big a deal as they think it is (not trying to start a debate here; i could have easily turned the example around).
in other words, give yourselves something to agree on before going down the rabbit hole, and you’re at least starting out on the right foot. no guarantee you’ll convince anyone of anything though.
“don’t feed the pigeons.” Something we all have to practice. You can’t fix the foolery of others.
why do you assume that you can’t use facts and figures? what i would try to do is get them to agree on the facts and make the arguments based on a mutually agreed upon set of facts.
i don’t think everyone agrees upon coronavirus facts because the situation is changing quickly and there is reason to doubt figures coming from china. so you may have a hard time there.
in the IT example, you could do an additional mathematical calculation based on a mutually agreed upon assumption or figure to support your argument.
for example, if they can agree that 1 day of downtime = $100k in lost productivity and that an average water leak or power outage is likely to lead to 2.5 days of lost productivity, and that it is 10% likely that they will incur that once per year, and they can agree a catastrophe will result in $1MM of lost productivity but it is .00001% likely that they will incur that at least once per year, show them the math. that’s basic risk analysis. simple multiplication. maybe help them bridge the gap by suggesting catastrophe insurance.
the venezuela argument is not going to convince anyone, simply because people who are arguing the irrational perspective have been duped by people who already know and understand the argument you are making, and they have ulterior motives and more clout, and they aren’t sharing the information you both know about oil and food with the people they are duping. one argument isn’t enough to un-brainwash someone. they likely don’t care enough about the subject and may not take it as seriously as you do. but i don’t think you really need to wonder why mike pompeo doesn’t understand what you’re talking about. he does. he just has political reasons for suggesting otherwise. in other words, again, you don’t have a mutually agreed upon set of facts with the person you’re arguing with. and in this case, they may have personal reasons for not wanting to believe you (e.g. anti-socialism, supporter of american interventionist foreign policy, etc). so this is the hardest of all in my opinion.
No, but a fool can be led through twisting arguments that are in their preconceived notions in your favor. Just want to learn more of those techniques.
Take the Coronavirus as an example. How do you argue with someone that they're much more likely to die in a car crash or from the regular flu than the Coronavirus without using facts and figures?
For an IT disaster recovery perspective, how do you argue that you should prioritize planning for recovery after a water leak or power outage in a server room rather than an event that will destroy all server data and make the building inhabitable?
Kind of like planning for a hurricane in Arizona.
Another example that comes up around diversification is Venezuela's economic collapse is due to Socialism rather than an economy based solely on oil exports and massive imports of food and other resources. Once the price of your largest export tanks, don't be surprised if you don't have the money to pay for your imports and it leads to shortages.
How do you explain to people that haven't taken a class in economics that you can't just print more money, and that the problems would still happen regardless of the government economic model without a diverse economy resistant to export commodity pricing bubbles?
I dont doubt the seriousness of the virus epidemic in China, I doubt the rationality of people buying facemasks to protect themselves when they don't wash their hands or wear eye protection. Also, the number of US cases are still supported at this time unless you think the CDC would deliberately under report as well.
The IT example are people who have watched too many natural disasters movies, and how to argue against their cognitive biases. I'm wanting to learn how to steer them away from those scenarios to something more reasonable.
As for the last one, the "facts" that they've been fed prejudices them from any other facts that are presented to the contrary. I've found that even if you give them supporting information and hard numbers, they're unwilling to give up their previous stance and actually double down on their resistance to the argument. Good New Yorker article about what I'm trying to learn how to convince against:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds