By: Ethan

Source: Jordan Peterson

DEBATING BASICS
Debating isn’t just about stating facts and statistics, It’s more on the conversation. There are a lot of things you need to
consider in order to win a debate like the tone of the opposing party’s voice, the word choice, and subtle tricks that they
may utilize to lead you into saying something you don’t agree with automatically making you lose the debate.

Jordan Peterson (defending side) Vs Cathy Newman (opposing side)

(Jordan Peterson won)
Gaining respect vs. Being aggressive
(Offense)
We often think that getting respect and being aggressive go hand in hand, because unfortunately, it’s often the bully who gets the most respect in the school yard and even the
work place, but Jordan Peterson is an exemplar of a different way to get massive amounts of respect even without being aggressive. Here are 2 things he does to gain respect.

1. Pacing your reality

Even when he doesn’t share your beliefs, he shows that he understands why you might think the things that you do. Jordan
grants that the side that he does not agree with, has really strong points that are in his favor. This might sound counter
productive If you’re trying to persuade someone, but it actually makes people more open to changing their mind, because in any
discussion, the absolute hardest thing to do is to admit that you might be wrong and risk appearing dumb. That’s why saying
things like “hey, you raise a great point” or “I totally see how you see things that way” is so important during a heated argument.
It let’s the other person not feel dumb if they wind up changing their minds.

2. Encouraging dialogue

The biggest thing you can learn from Dr. Peterson is that if you want people to respect you and you don’t want to do it in an aggressive way, you have to consider the
other person. You consider their reality, and you pace it in your speech. You consider their attention span and you wrap your points in engaging stories. And you
consider that they may have something to teach you, so you speak with them rather than shout at them.
Effortlessly defending yourself in an argument
(Defense)
We’ve all found ourselves in conversation and felt attacked, like we started off talking about one thing and then the other person twisted our words and before we knew it, we lost our cool, lost
respect in their eyes, and maybe even acted like a jerk. This is how you can handle someone who uses subtle conversational tricks to bully you into looking dumb. Here are some of the most
common tricks that other people may be using on you in a heated argument.

Realize what’s going on before it’s too late

Typically, a person will reveal their aggressive attitude early on with their tone of voice and word choice, kind of like this.

Jordan: But it’s not.. I wasn’t specifically aiming the message at young men to begin with, it just kind of turned out that way but-
Cathy: But it’s mostly,, you admit, it’s mostly men listening.

In this case, Cathy has indicated very clearly that she things that Jordan has done something wrong, otherwise, why would she use the word “admit”. She makes her stance clear a moment later
when she implies that he should be bothered for being “divisive”

Cathy: Does it bother you that your audience is predominantly male? Isn’t that a bit divisive?

The point is, that even when they’re being passive aggressive, people will often indicate they’re about to attack you before they actually do. So if you hear someone say something like “Well, what
do you have to say for yourself” BE PREPARED. That person thinks that you’ve done something wrong and you need to be very careful what you say next, not because you did do something wrong,
but because a conversational bully may be trying to trap you into saying something that you disagree with so that they can attack that strawman.

Straw man fallacy – Substituting a person’s actual position or argument with a distorted , exaggerated or misrepresented version of the position or argument.

The first way this often happens is called the “So your saying” Trap.
The “So your saying”
trap
The general pattern here is that someone says “so your saying” and proceeds to oversimplify or mischaracterize what you actually said.
This is very easy to spot and it’s rather simple to avoid and get around by saying “Well actually what I was saying is” and then repeat the point that they’re trying to
attack.

Assuming the sale

There’s a much sneakier way that people may mischaracterize your beliefs and then attack them. Basically, it’s when someone’s words imply that you believe
something that you don’t, and they don’t actually say it. In business they call this, “assuming the sale” like when a car salesman says “So would you like that with the
leather interior, or with the fabric interior?” Before you’ve even decided to buy the car.

For example:
Cathy: Why should women put up with those reasons?

Embedded in the question, are several important presumptions namely,

1. That there is something to put up with
2. Jordan thinks women should put up with it

The trap here for Jordan, is for him to answer the question directly, and many of us fall into this trap, then we start arguing for things that we don’t really even believe
just out of habit.
Instead, you need to identify that hidden presumption and call it out.

Cathy: But why shouldn’t women have the right to choose not to have children?
Jordan: They do, they can yeah, that’s fine

The hidden presumption is that Cathy thinks that Jordan thinks that women shouldn’t have the right to not have children. When these things are laid out, they're
really easy to understand. But in real time, this can be difficult. One simple thing that you can do to make it easy on yourself is to purposefully assume a relaxed
posture.
Assume a relaxed
posture
Jordan does this throughout the entire conversation with Cathy Newman. This posture actually helps you to think less frantically because your body is signaling to your brain that everything is
alright, and that your in control. You’ll also want to give yourself some time to pause and think after each question Which Dr. Peterson definitely does.

The smash technique

It’s when people embed statements that you disagree with, and moving forward before you can have the time to address that disagreement. You may have also seen people barrage you with
questions, just to overwhelm you into having to accept their points like this;

Cathy: Otherwise, why would there only be seven women running 100 footsy companies in the UK? Why,, Why would there still be a pay gap which we’ve discussed? Why are the women at the
BBC saying that they're getting paid Illegally less than men?

It can be easy to get overwhelmed and to lose focus as you try to answer all of these questions but with the smash technique in general, the best policy is to slow down the speed of
conversation, and tackle one question and one point at a time.
How to persuade someone in a heated argument
Jordan really isn't necessarily trying to change Cathy’s mind but simply to debate in front of an audience (similar to our marvel debate and the upcoming marvel
debate) but there are still some valuable tips to keep in mind.

DO NOT STRAW MAN THE OTHER PERSON’S IDEAS

Do not do this, even if they do this to you. Instead, show the other person that you are truly engaging in their real points, attempt to understand them.
Sometimes this means that you have to ask them to repeat themselves so that you can.

MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND YOU

After you’ve made an honest attempt to understand them, you need to make sure that they can understand you, which is necessary for persuasion.
You will often have to use visual imagery for instance, here’s a very abstract point without any images that you can make;

Speaker: This dance should be the national dance of the Philippines because it’s been here for several thousand years and has never changed since it’s inception.

Maybe you can understand that, but it kind of lacks any emotional impact, but notice how the addition of a concrete example makes that several thousand years
Feel different;

Speaker: That’s so long that several thousand years ago, the Spanish haven't even arrived yet. It’s a long time

Adding concrete examples, especially ones that people could easily imagine, is a smart persuasive move.

Lastly, when your arguing often times, the best way to get someone to change their position, is not by changing their mind, but by gently showing them that
they're already agreeing with you
Showing them that they're already agreeing
with you
Here’s an example with Cathy Newman and Jordan Peterson;

Cathy: Why should your right to freedom of speech trump a trans person’s right not to be offended?
Jordan: Because to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive.
Jordan: I mean look at the conversation we’re having right now, you know like, your certainly willing to risk
offending me in the pursuit of truth.
Jordan: Why should YOU have the right to do that? It’s been rather uncomfortable.

This is huge. Jordan is no longer arguing that her point is wrong, he's arguing that she already agrees with
him. Her behavior and her previous statements demonstrate that she cares more about free speech than not
offending people, and then Jordan doesn’t try to make this point wrong he shows her how they’re actually
very much In alignment.

Jordan: You’re doing what you should do which is digging a bit to see what the hell’s going on, and that is
what you should do, but you’re exercising your freedom of speech to certainly risk offending me, and that’s
fine.
Jordan: I think, more power to you as far as I'm concerned.

And then of course Cathy does feel stumped because she does actually agree with Jordan and that she’s
proven it herself. People have a strong desire to remain consistent with things they’ve already said and
done. So often times, this becomes one of the few ways to persuade someone who’s really dug in their
heels.

You’re basically showing them that they don’t have to move in order to agree with you, they already do, Cathy Newman (Stumped)
right where they’re dug in. And then of course, Jordan hits her with the “Hah, Gotcha”

But “Gotcha” does not improve anyone’s case. It actually makes Cathy feel silly and wrong as opposed to
happy to discover that she and Jordan are really on the same team all along.