Fundamentals of dispute management. Principles and rules of conducting a dispute. Dispute types: discussion, controversy, debate, debate, etc. The technique of persuasion as the main element of the culture of the dispute

Mastering the culture of a dispute, one should master the most important thing - the principles and rules of conducting a dispute, which:

Allow you to better prepare for the conduct of the dispute;

Organize and mobilize to win the dispute;

They allow you to logically correctly argue and consistently defend your position;

They learn to take into account the advantages and be tolerant of the shortcomings of opponents;

They focus on using their strengths and overcoming their weaknesses.

Almost each of the considered principles is implemented through a set of certain rules. The principle sets the strategy, the direction of activity, the rules characterize tactics, specific actions. The principle most often answers the question: what needs to be done to achieve the ultimate goal, and the rule gives an answer to the question of how to act in a given situation.

The principle of preliminary preparation for conducting a dispute. In accordance with this principle, preliminary preparation for conducting a dispute allows you not only to mobilize, but also to think a lot and even simulate the most probable course of the discussion-argument, make some “preparations”, collect and comprehend some initial information.

The principle of tolerant attitude towards dissidents. The essence of the principle is that the opposite side, just like you, has the right to its opinion. She, like you, strives for the truth, but the process of her search must be correct on both sides.

The principle of sequential analysis of alternatives. The essence of this principle lies in the fact that almost any problem or task has, as a rule, several possible approaches, solutions. However, not all approaches, ways of solving problems are equally optimal. Already two different ways depending on the conditions, goals, means, they can serve the truth to varying degrees.

The principle of correct conduct of the dispute. This is one of the basic principles of conducting disputes, negotiations, which lies in the fact that the more correct

Your judgments and actions will be, the more chances you have for a worthy victory over your opponent, opponent.

The principle of "dismissal" in the process of conducting a dispute. It has long been noticed that the dispute is won not only by the one who speaks more eruditely and with more reason, but first of all by the one who, as if observing the course of the discussion-dispute, sees everything that happens as a whole and is able to correct his shortcomings and mistakes along the way, to rise above personal interests and overcome psychological barriers.

The principle of overcoming psychological barriers in the process of conducting a dispute. The essence of this principle lies in the fact that there are a number of false internal attitudes, conditions, without overcoming which the effectiveness of your argumentation is reduced. This may be, for example, an attitude that the opposite side is better prepared than you, and therefore stronger than you. Or, for example, the fear of looking worse than your opponent already inhibits and hides your judgments and actions.

The principle of gradual progress towards the truth. The essence of this method lies in the fact that the effectiveness of arguing and moving towards the truth directly depends on how clearly the phases, stages of arguing, alternative approaches to solving the problem are singled out and indicated, and each of the alternatives clearly puts forward its arguments "for" and "against". one or the other approach to problem solving.

The principle of respect for the personality of the opponent. The essence of this principle lies in the fact that true freedom of opinion and judgment presupposes a high culture of discussions and disputes. And for this, at least, a respectful attitude towards dissent, that is, the opponent, is necessary. Thoughts, judgments should be opposed by more convincing, more evidential judgments and thoughts, and in no case offensive attacks.

The principle of reasoned constructive criticism. The essence of this

The principle is that when criticizing your opposite point of view, you should not limit yourself to this, you must express your constructive proposals, new approaches or ways to solve the problem. In other words, criticism should include not bare denial, but also constructive suggestions, alternatives.

Memo of a controversialist

Starting a discussion of a controversial issue, establish what is the subject of your disagreement with your opponents, clearly define the subject of the dispute.

Do not start arguing if you are not well versed in the subject of the dispute. If the dispute is known in advance, carefully prepare for it, do not spare time and effort to replenish knowledge about the subject of the dispute.

Do not lose the subject of the dispute in the process of discussing it. Do not miss the main provisions, because of which there is a dispute. Don't let your adversary take you away from the main point of the dispute.

Take a definite and firm position in the dispute.

When preparing for a discussion, polemic, highlight the main concepts related to the subject of the dispute. Clarify the meaning of the terms you intend to use in the discussion.

In the course of the dispute, make sure that the polemicists put the same content into the concepts used. Otherwise, this can lead to ambiguity in statements, to a misunderstanding of the opponent's position.

Learn to correctly reveal the content of concepts, explain the meaning of terms. Apply various ways interpretation of words. Actively use linguistic and encyclopedic dictionaries for this purpose.

During an argument, pay attention to the behavior of your opponent. Try to understand the motives of his actions and statements, take into account the individual characteristics of his character, the manner of arguing. Try to correctly measure your abilities and capabilities with the forces of the enemy.

Be respectful of your opponent's views and beliefs. If you do not agree with his point of view, strongly refute it, give convincing arguments in defense of your position, but do not humiliate your opponent, do not insult him with harsh words, do not resort to rudeness. Speak in a calm and friendly tone.

Maintain patience and composure. You should not get excited over trifles. Remember that in an excited state it is more difficult to correctly assess the situation that has arisen, to pick up strong arguments.

Conclusion

Thus, a dispute is a clash, a juxtaposition of opinions, a public discussion of problems, when everyone tries to prove his case.

The purpose of the dispute may be to discover the truth or achieve victory.

The dispute is an important means of clarifying and resolving issues that cause disagreement, a better understanding of what is not sufficiently clear and has not yet found a convincing justification. Even if the parties to the dispute do not eventually come to an agreement, in the course of the dispute they better understand both the positions of the other side and their own.

The art of arguing is called eristic. The art of argument is characterized by the main features: evidence and persuasiveness.

In Russian, there are words that serve as varieties of dispute.

Discussion, public discussion of a controversial issue or problem, sometimes turns into a dispute in its purest form. Usually competent persons take part in the discussion with the intention to reach an optimal mutually acceptable solution.

Controversy is a kind of discussion, a dispute that turns into the imposition of one's own point of view. The purpose of the debate, unlike the discussion, is not to achieve mutual understanding and the final optimal result, but

proof of your correctness.

Debate is an exchange of opinions at a meeting, meeting, meeting. This is a dispute, but a dispute by the rules. All these types of disputes are communication between several people or their groups. The peculiarity is that they can imperceptibly flow from one form to another, depending on the ultimate goal.

In the concept of "dispute culture" we include knowledge of the subject of the dispute, understanding the essence of the dispute and its varieties, compliance with the basic requirements of the culture of the dispute, the ability to prove the position put forward and refute the opponent's opinion, the use of polemical techniques, the ability to resist the opponent's tricks.

Mastering the culture of the dispute, it is necessary to master the principles of arguing, which will allow you to better prepare for arguing; organize and mobilize to win the dispute; allow you to logically correctly argue and consistently defend your position; learn to take into account the advantages and be tolerant of the shortcomings of opponents; focus on using their strengths and overcoming their weaknesses.

So, the generalization of what has been said is expressed in the basic rules for conducting a dispute:

1. Be able to correctly identify the subject of the dispute and highlight the points of disagreement.

2. Do not lose sight of the main provisions, because of which the dispute is being fought.

3. Clearly define your position in the dispute.

4. Correctly use concepts in a dispute.

5. Treat your opponent with respect.

6. Maintain restraint and self-control in a dispute.

7. Pay attention to the opponent's behavior, learn to correctly evaluate his actions.

The habit of arguing, characteristic of many people, can even be useful, but only if the dispute is conducted correctly and competently, observing certain rules and principles. In addition, we need to be tolerant of criticism and not be afraid that someone points out our mistakes.

Through an open and open exchange of views, a broad public dialogue, it is possible to solve many problems. The ability to competently and fruitfully discuss vital issues, prove and convince, reasonably defend one's point of view and refute the opponent's opinion, that is, possession of a culture of dispute should become an obligatory quality of every educated person.

The basis of any relationship between two or more people is communication, during which they exchange facts, information and their own opinions. Disagreement between views and positions can lead to disputes. An important condition for its beginning is the desire of the participants to defend their point of view.

The essence of the concept

The dispute is a verbal competition, but the meaning of the word also has a broader concept, reflecting the confrontation of the parties. Participants can be two or more people.

Verbal confrontation is actively used before making deals, during negotiations. Scientists or grandmothers in the yard can argue.

The ability to properly argue is recognized as an art called eristics.

The tradition of conducting such fights came to us from ancient Greece. In the future, tough laws were created according to which they can be carried out.

Initially, the goal was to get the truth. Over time, the verbal contest has become a tool to achieve victory at any cost.

Today, the characteristic "an inveterate debater" has a rather negative connotation. The extreme expressions of this phenomenon are bickering and demagogy. Demagogues use implicit methods of false reasoning, use complex forms of position presentation, masking logical contradictions. The set of such a debater also includes fawning and populism.

Classification

The classification is based on one of characteristic features competition. There are several main types.

• Discussion- business conversations in the search for truth are often calm, honest methods are used to refute the arguments of the opposite side.

• Dispute- a public competition on the topic of a given thesis. This form is often used when defending scientific papers or discussing a certain problem by people who sometimes have the same positions.
• controversy- active verbal confrontation with the aim of defeating the enemy. Confrontation is often possible, but within the framework of generally accepted norms of behavior and morality.

• Debate or debate- public clashes of opinion, demonstrating the positions of different parties. Most often they happen as a reaction to a message, a speech at a conference, during an election campaign.

Disputes involving the use of incorrect methods:

• eclecticism - conducted to achieve the truth;
• sophistry - to achieve victory over the enemy at any cost.

The nature of the verbal competition is influenced by the goals, the importance of the problem or information being discussed, the number of participants and the form of the duel. V last years arguing for the sake of arguing became popular. Participants practice techniques without achieving a specific goal, but for their own pleasure.

Ethics and rules of conduct

The ethics of the dispute is based on the rules and principles of preparation:

• thinking over the tactics of conducting a verbal battle, choosing the main goal and choosing the main arguments;
• readiness for any scenario;
• studying the level of preparation of your opponent, his positive and negative sides in the conduct of a dispute;
• focus on the topic of discussion.

According to the rules of etiquette, it is necessary to listen to the opponent, allowing him to express his point of view to the end.

There are a few more rules:

• never allow yourself to sink to the level of an opponent with his aggressive and unreasonable attacks;
• when denying any thesis, it is necessary not only to say “no”, but also to give at least a couple of arguments;
• it is necessary to criticize only with a constructive approach;
• thoughts must be countered by thoughts, not by analysis of the shortcomings of the personality.

The culture of verbal combat is not an easy task. Constant self-development, an increase in your own knowledge base, new tricks, iron logic will help you achieve success in any dispute.

For more on the art of arguing, see the next video.

"...tastes could not be discussed? But all life is a dispute about tastes! ”- Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, a German philosopher and poet of the 19th century, used to say this. Argument and quarrel, how often they go hand in hand. People do not like being pressured, and therefore there have always been and will always be disputes. However, to conduct a calm discussion or turn the dispute into a high degree with a transition to personalities is the choice of the participants in the action. It depends on the general culture, etiquette, temperament, goals and endurance of the disputants. V modern world there are dispute rules.

feel the difference

A dispute is a clash, a juxtaposition of opinions, a public discussion of problems. As a result, different points of view collide, everyone tries to prove his case. A dispute consists of evidence, and requires rethinking by both parties. A dispute is a phase of discussion, often characterized by the intransigence of the parties, the transition to emotions to the detriment of logic.

Discussion (from Latin discussio - consideration, research), public discussion of a controversial issue or problem, sometimes turns into a dispute in its purest form. Usually competent persons take part in the discussion with the intention to reach an optimal mutually acceptable solution.

Controversy (from the Greek polemikos - military, hostile) - a kind of discussion, dispute, turning into the imposition of one's own point of view. The purpose of the controversy, unlike the discussion, is not to achieve mutual understanding and the final optimal result, but to prove one's innocence.

Debate (French debats, from debattre - to argue) is an exchange of views at a meeting, meeting, meeting. This is a dispute, but a dispute by the rules. The art of conducting competent debates is taught in serious clubs by political technologists and business coaches. Debates are subject to their own mechanisms and rules: honesty, respect for the opponent and the principle “learning is more important than winning”, that is, to win the dispute is not the main thing, it is more important to learn something in this process.

There are many formats of debate in the modern world: parliamentary debates (according to the American and British formats), political debates, the model of the United Nations, the format manager, the Karl Popper debate program, open debates.

All these types of disputes, in essence, are conversations, communication of several people or their groups. The peculiarity is that they can imperceptibly flow from one form to another, depending on the ultimate goal.

Conditions for starting a dispute

The dispute begins there and then, when the following conditions coincide:

• the presence of at least two parties that have a different view on the same problem;
• the presence of disagreements on the issue of the dispute and the desire to defend their point of view;
• willingness to argue and the presence of strong arguments for winning it.

The argument must have some specific purpose. Before getting involved in a discussion, you need to ask yourself the question - what do I want to achieve as a result of this dispute? Justify your thoughts? Find confirmation for them? Refute the thoughts of the enemy? Or inquire about something?

Awareness is akin to real intelligence, without it there is no point in getting involved in a dispute at all. It is quite possible that there is no problem at all, that both opponents think the same way, they just don’t know how to put it into words, emotions take over.

Rules for conducting a constructive dispute

A bit of history

Who was the very first debater on Earth? Who decided to oppose their opinion to the decision of society? When did the world's first controversy take place? It is unlikely that historians will be able to answer this question with accuracy. It has always been human to argue.

History has preserved to this day the legend of the life of the great debater Socrates, who had followers and students. The teachings of Socrates made a revolution in philosophy - the great genius proposed to move away from consideration of nature and the world and turn to the essence of man, his role. The philosopher led his students to knowledge through dialogue, developing a culture of discussion. The fashionable genre of those years "apologia" helped his followers Plato, Lysias and Xenophon to defend and promote the teachings and righteous cause of Socrates. The anti-Socratic trend opposed its own idea - "accusation, accusatory speeches." In the very first decade after the death of the great ancient Greek philosopher, this literary form used by the rhetorician, writer Polycrates.

Why does the argument of some people resemble a graceful dance with blades, while others resemble a bazaar farce? There is a huge gulf between idle talk and a high style of polemic. Getting from the shore of ignorance to the edge of skillful verbal combat requires knowledge of the rules. But which ones exactly? And is it enough to know universal principles to be a genius of discussion?

Everything is aggravated by the fact that there are different types disputes. Does it affect the course of the dialogue? About this, as well as about the nuances of polemical skill - later in the article.

What is a dispute

An argument is an active discussion of a topic around which different opinions have formed. The main goal of the dispute is to convince the opponent that he is right, to prove that his own point of view is the truth. Any number of speakers can participate in a controversial competition.

What distinguishes an argument from a simple dialogue? Not an increase in tone, not a punch on the table, and not even an argument. What then? Each of the participants understands that he is arguing with an opponent, stating this directly, but without entering into an open conflict. Argument is a verbal masterpiece, only true masters are capable of creating it. What is the essence of the controversy?

What is the art of argument

There are three main signs of a skillful argument:

1. the disputed topic is relevant, open;
2. opponents alternately use not only facts, arguments, but also psychological tricks;
3. the result of the discussion is a peaceful resolution of the conflict or the desired truth.

And vice versa. It is impossible to call dialogue a masterful verbal duel if these features are not observed. In a closed problem, for which there is already a well-known irrefutable answer, there is nothing to argue about. A simple enumeration of factual information is boring, more is needed for a dispute - psychology, knowledge of how to influence an opponent. If, in the end, the whole process ends in scolding, a quarrel, then there is no art in such a dispute.

Types of disputes

constructive and destructive

The first type of dispute is creative, the second is destructive. This is the main difference. As a result of a constructive dialogue, the interlocutors come to the same point of view, use honest methods of struggle.

A destructive look gives rise to quarrels, accusations, insults and even fights. During such communication, politeness and logic are not respected. The participants in such a skirmish are aimed at winning their opinions, therefore they ignore the views of the opponent, even if they are well-reasoned.

Oral and written/printed

The oral type includes conversations in real time. They can be public, group, private. Their main advantages are speed, openness, independence from conditions, expressiveness.
Written includes correspondence through paper letters, mobile messages, Internet chats. For their implementation, you will need gadgets or writing utensils. They are less emotional. The benefits of printed disputes include:

• think over each remark;
• edit the text, correct typographical errors before sending so that the opponent does not know about the errors;
• attach facts-evidence - links to authoritative articles, laws, images, video and audio recordings;
• use messages - yours and the interlocutor, to prove that some kind of remark was really in the course of the conversation;
• do not openly show your own emotions so that the opponent does not take advantage of this.

Organized and spontaneous

The first type of dispute is contractual in nature. Participants agree on a meeting indicating the exact date, time, place. They get the opportunity to plan their speeches in advance, think over the pros and cons of their own scheme, and mentally prepare.

Spontaneous discussions are spontaneous. For their occurrence, an unexpected occasion is required, which arises under the influence of external conditions or the words of the interlocutor. Such conversations better than others show the ability to argue, oratory, richness of speech, breadth of outlook, knowledge.

Thematic

The varieties of these conversations are determined by the subject of discussion, which can be:

• philosophical;
• political;
• personal;
• artistic;
• social;
• ethical;
• scientific;
• religious.

Each of these topics includes thousands of subsections. As a rule, contestants discuss no more than two problems at the same time - both the main global ones and narrower subtopics.

Targeted

Types of tasks that the parties to the dispute set for themselves:

• win over an opponent;
• find the truth;
• convince the interlocutor;
• peacefully resolve the conflict;
• argue for the sake of the process itself.

The last paragraph is interpreted in two ways. Such a desire may indicate a desire to piss off an opponent, to enjoy his breakdown. This is a negative aspect. Positive implies a love of psychological tricks, enjoyment of a correct verbal contest. For this type of person, arguing is true art without any negativity.

Dispute rules

Respect for the opponent

A person who raises his voice during a skirmish, becomes personal, automatically becomes a loser. And few people want to communicate with this type later. In order not to lose your dignity even in the midst of polemical rivalry, it is enough to adhere to elementary rules:

• listen to the opponent to the end without interrupting him;
• do not affect intimate topics, awkward moments;
• be polite, show upbringing in every deed and word;
• respect the opinion of the opponent. It is not necessary to agree with him, but it is important to understand the right to one's point of view;
• complete the discussion that has begun to the end, without leaving everything halfway because of the fear of defeat;
• keep your own emotions under control, do not break down on the interlocutor;
• be able to delicately end the skirmish if the enemy suddenly ceased to control himself and is ready to start a quarrel.

Politeness in an argument is not just a good trait. It helps to win, to provoke an opponent, to make him doubt his views. And this is the art of verbal combat.

Attention to speech

The tone of a successful speaker is always firm, expressing confidence. The only exceptions are those moments when methods of mental influence are used. It is better not to lower your voice to a whisper, trying to give yourself mystery. This looks ridiculous. However, there is no point in screaming. In this regard, there is nothing better than the golden mean.

It is advisable not to forget about attention to speech during written disputes. Illiterate messages are an instant defeat. If a person makes elementary mistakes in the text, this shows his disrespect for himself, the addressee. In such a person begin to doubt. If a person does not have the desire or ability to edit his mistakes, then he treats other issues in the same way.

Logic and reasoning

The thesis is defined, facts on the topic are found, 3 books on oratorical tricks are read. Is everything ready for a fight?
It turns out that it doesn't. It is not enough to collect information and lay it out as you please. It is important to provide evidence for your claims. And more importantly, tie it all into a logical, coherent presentation. Actually, it's not that easy. In addition, it is not known how the interlocutor will behave, whether after his speech he will have to change the course of his own. Here is a rough outline of the presentation:

• statement of your thesis;
• a short story about why this fact seems true or false, based on personal beliefs;
• providing arguments in your favor from authoritative sources - the work of great people, scientific facts, material evidence, etc.;
• work with the arguments of the opponent - acceptance or reasonable denial;
• summing up, re-proclaiming the thesis or refuting it.

Aces up your sleeve

No one is interested in hearing dry information. Evidence, as well as the emotional component of the dispute, dilute this calm. However, strategy and tricks are considered the best method, for example:

• false agreement with the opinion of the opponent - for a sharp attack or turning the competitor's evidence against him;
• game of contrasts;
• provocation of emotions without becoming personal or rude;
• double standarts;
• inventing false facts with the subsequent disclosure of deception;
• flattery;
• enticing the public to their side, obtaining its support;
• hiding a key powerful argument until the climax.

Accepting the Exodus

No matter how the dispute ends, it is better to accept its outcome with dignity. In case of victory, one cannot mock the enemy, humiliate him, boast of victory. You can praise him for interesting moments, thank him for the honor of competing, his time, and informative information.

• continue to deny obvious facts;
• to reproach the opponent and the public for stupidity, illegibility;
• react violently to a loss;
• silently leave the “battlefield”;
• clearly offended;
• to accuse everyone of rigging, cheating, if it is directly visible that the competition was fair;
• come up with ridiculous false arguments in pursuit.

Arguing is not an art for the lazy or the weak. Manners, fortitude, perseverance, determination, sharpness of mind are manifested in it. Seeing how a person argues, you can know him from the inside. A person who, in a dispute, aims at a calm resolution of a conflict of interest, looks noble. That is why you want to communicate with such people much more than with loud idle talk. It is a great honor and a real pleasure to have a debate with someone who really knows how to argue.

In our life, at least once each of us had an argument or some kind of debate, and in order to be a winner, it is important to know in this matter basic rules for conducting a dispute.

Dispute Rules: conflict should not be allowed to arise.

If you want to emerge victorious in a particular dispute, you just need to change the position and opinion of the interlocutor. Only in this way will you succeed in any discussion. But in some cases, an effective dialogue can turn into a skirmish. When conducting a dispute, you need to restrain emotions and not move on to open conflicts. Sometimes it's just not possible to avoid an argument. In some cases, when conducting a dispute, it is worth trying to smooth the situation, try to reduce the heat.

Dispute Rules: try to find out the opinion of the interlocutor, his views and how he looks at the problem. When conducting a dispute, do not ever hurt the opponent's pride and do not try to underestimate his self-esteem. This may give rise to negative consequences. The thoughts that you express should not be imposed, do not interrupt your opponent. Until your interlocutor fully expresses his thought and speaks out, he will not listen to you. He is just psychologically not ready to listen to you. For effective communication, you need to warm the ground, from this your ideas will fit better in the mind of your opponent.

Dispute Rules: the interlocutor must know that you respect his ideas and position.

It is always possible and necessary to make normal productive communication out of any dispute, this is the basic rule for conducting a dispute.

To begin with, you need to clarify clarifying questions in order for the other opinion to become transparent and clear.
Next, make it clear that you are reflecting on the position of your interlocutor, and trying to understand it.

Dispute Rules: Don't aim for total defeat of your opponent.

Losing in a controversial situation is a serious blow to self-esteem and reputation, and this can ultimately negatively affect further communication between two people. If there is no conflict in your dispute, and this will be a constructive dialogue not in a raised voice, both parties will be in a winning situation, and subsequently remain on good terms.

Dispute Rules: Try to keep a low profile and express your thoughts accurately.

Our arguments are not always complete and sufficient. Sometimes we exaggerate their importance in order to emerge victorious in the conduct of a dispute. To achieve the desired result, sometimes we resort to raising our voice. This is not permissible, as a rule, this action irritates the interlocutor's hearing and pushes for reciprocal actions, which leads to the emergence of a conflict.

Dispute Rules: use a third party.

The very situation of the dispute implies the appearance of an unfriendly atmosphere. If the unfavorable situation is smoothed over by a constructive dialogue, then the arguments will be better understood and accepted.

Man on subconscious level, must understand and feel the opponent, you must navigate the situation, see and understand when you need to smooth it out, and when to put a little pressure, and then you will develop your own basic rules for conducting a dispute.