| [ NWU ] in KIDS 글 쓴 이(By): foobar (현 승석) 날 짜 (Date): 1998년 8월 27일 목요일 오후 01시 05분 30초 제 목(Title): How to Argue Effectively 이거 꽤 오래된 유머라는데 저는 오늘에야 읽었습니다. 잼있어서 퍼올립니다. 파치노님께서 대표로 지도교수님에게 써먹어보고 결과를 알려주시기 바랍니다. 푸바 >How to Argue Effectively: > >I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an >argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this and >steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they >don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these >rules: > > * Drink liquor. > >Suppose you are at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding >on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're >drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, >afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. >But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG >VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. >You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting >furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room. > > * Make things up. > >Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove that > >Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU > >are underpaid, and you'll be damned if you're going to let a bunch of >Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: "I think Peruvians are underpaid." >Say instead: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for >the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before >the mean gross poverty level." > > NOTE: Always make up exact figures. > >If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up >too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the >Buford Commission published on May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?" >Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say, "You left your >soiled underwear in my bathroom." > > * Use meaningless but weighty-sounding words and phrases. > >Memorize this list: > > Let me put it this way > In terms of > Vis-a-vis > Per se > As it were > Qua > So to speak > >You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.", >"e.g.", and "i.e." These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you don't." > >Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say, > >"Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have > >enough money." > >You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say, >"Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis >Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to >speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D." > >Only a fool would challenge that statement. > > * Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks. > >You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at >your opponents when they make valid points. The best are: > > You're begging the question. > You're being defensive. > Don't compare apples to oranges. > What are your parameters? > >This last one is especially valuable. Nobody (other than engineers and >policy wonks) has the vaguest idea what "parameters" means. > >Here's how to use your comebacks: > >You say: As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873... >Your opponent says: Lincoln died in 1865. >You say: You're begging the question. > >You say: Liberians, like most Asians... >Your opponent says: Liberia is in Africa. >You say: You're being defensive. > > * Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler. > >This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right >and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say, >"That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say," or >"You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler." > >So that's it. You now know how to out-argue anybody. Do not try to pull >any of this on people who generally carry weapons. > |