Get down to business! New non-fiction books: if you don’t convince after four word exchanges, you won’t succeed again

class=”sc-29f61514-0 fQbOYE”>

There are unintentional arguments that work in any discussion. Recently I saw a new solo program “Wo bini gsi?” Swiss cabaret artist Patrick Frey (74 years old). In it, he provided two precise answers that can be used in any conversation: “Someone has to pay for this” or: “But not in the south!” The interlocutor should be surprised and laugh at these always appropriate and at the same time meaningless interjections – but then there is silence and the discussion ends.

“Everyone who wants to debate must know these rules,” is the subtitle of the Swiss science journalist Reto W. Schneider (60) in his recently published book The Art of Intelligent Debate. Known for his excellent “Experiment” column in the NZZ Folio, the skilled electrical engineer writes nine equally brilliant and plausible ideas – these must be considered if you want to talk to other people; People who may even have a different opinion.

“If you have no other goal from the very beginning than to convince your interlocutor,” Schneider writes, “you should ask yourself why they should not have the same goal as you.” The more persistently this goal is pursued, the more hopeless it is: if you do not convince after four exchanges of words, you will not achieve more. First of all, everyone should have the desire to change themselves. Because, in the words of Schneider, “An opinion you know you will never change is not an opinion at all, but a belief.”

Even scientific theories must be revised, otherwise they are religious dogmas: in the 17th century, for example, blowing tobacco smoke into the buttocks of patients was a common attempt at resuscitation, in the 19th century cocaine was considered a remedy for hay fever, and as early as 1923 it was said that smoking helps to cure asthma – all the debunked opinions that we laugh at today. Since the growth of knowledge is not slowing down, one has to assume that in a few hundred years, humanity will just as well laugh at some current opinions.

Even if scientific discoveries aren’t guaranteed forever, ETH alumnus Schneider says, “The most important foundation for forming an opinion is knowledge.” He advocates a simple explanation, but not a single example. “There is a simple answer on the side of statistics,” writes Schneider. “Any additional assumption could be a mistake.” To a specific individual example, he contrasts the amount of statistical data that he trusts more.

“We haven’t received or tested much of the knowledge we’re putting out for discussion,” Schneider writes. Anyone who has dealt with the topic only superficially should therefore adhere to the scientific consensus – here is the highest statistical hit rate. Otherwise, Schneider advises to be more resigned to the complexity of the world – sometimes you should not have an opinion on a topic.

Source: Blick