How to Present an Argument without Showing Up as a Prick

I made a short comment on a poster’s timeline the other day in response to a person I know and in support of a point she was making.

I got ripped into by some other unknown-to-me person on the thread for my views, and it really made no sense, as the response was sideways from the topic, but in alignment with the original posting, with which I agreed.

(Yes, girl, I am a writer and you found yourself the center character of my story – but don’t get to feeling too special, there are many who behave as you have.)

For this very reason, I rarely engage online anymore, preferring to expend my energy in real life, where I will likely not to be anonymously cold-cocked by some immature, self-righteous asshole who doesn’t know me from Adam, but feels compelled to throw insults and judgments around to “prove” their superiority. But this time, I felt it was an important enough issue to throw in my support. Unfortunately, I fell right into this troll's trap.

She does have a point I can feel empathy toward and feel the importance of the issue. What she – and many – might benefit from is a different approach. Instead of alienating a person of a differing view right off the bat, maybe try finding connection where people feel inspired to hear you out. We are all human.

I will share screenshots of the entire exchange below. This particular post began in order to bring to people’s attention the presentation of Donkey Baseball for use as entertainment and a fundraiser for some typical small-town-days celebration. For the record, I am against the “sport,” but this article isn’t about that. The screenshots and explanation of the original thread are only meant to provide context for the following comments, and used to point out why her approach was the opposite of effective to recruiting people to her side. This article could be about pretty much any issue a person feels inclined to argue.

Following is the conversation, which took place on a person’s public timeline, and so available for all to see:

(FYI -Even though this is a public conversation and easy enough to find, I attempted to cover the names of those involved except for mine – the magenta is the instigator, the light blue is another commentor who said basically the same thing I did and also got lambasted, and the dark blue is another person who popped up in the end with some lame comments and emojis of support for the magenta instigator.)

Let’s start with a definition of “argument” – the linked article below explains how arguments can be broken down into types, how we are actually engaged in arguments daily, whether we are aware of it or not, and the different components expected to appear in a valid argument.

Argument: The Basics | Department of Communication (pitt.edu)

Now we can break down the exchange and discuss why it is an ineffective approach for gaining allies or supporters.

Though I am by no means a “boomer,” I wish to share some of what I have learned over my time here on Earth. I have been through this stage of learning how to communicate on my journey to maturity. I’ve also learned the effectiveness of humility. Not that self-confidence is bad, but arrogance is limiting.

1. The first thing she did was enter into the discussion by throwing out a general insult, which only seems to have the intention of attracting people to engage with her comment so she could fire away negativities at them as a way to prove her own validity. The greatest effect this has is to immediately disregard her as a trolling nuisance, leaving others to feel immediately inflamed and on the defensive. That’s not how you want your audience to feel about communicating with you if you are trying to convince them that your point-of-view is worth consideration. Instead, it only highlights your selfish need for approval.

2. I made the mistake of responding with support for the original post, and she replied with harsh judgments and a statement that really went off on a tangent from the original topic, but designed to continue inflammatory engagement, seemingly only to prove her arrogant superiority over those differing from her in their views.

3. I more-or-less responded to the uncalled-for attack asking for clarification, in which she tried to backpedal slightly and detach herself a little bit by offering a fake sense of triteness and unaccountability.

4. When I chose not to engage further, her response was to throw an insult in my direction, trying to entice me into more negative exchanges in her further attempts to display her righteousness, by tearing into me, and then feeling vindication when I disengaged. I can’t read her mind, so cannot absolutely guess her intention here, but I can tell you from my perspective, it didn’t make me feel sympathetic toward her cause, nor in any essence did I feel inclined to consider her point or change my mind.

5. Hypocrisy is a human condition, even when we work our asses off to address it (which I do, in case you were wondering.) When you are absolutely positive that every move you make in the World does no harm, you are welcome to lecture me from your self-righteous podium.

Final Thoughts

If you want to be taken seriously in spreading a message, your approach needs to include empathy, understanding and tolerance. Anything less only results in alienation and a greater sense of potential listeners not wanting to be in your corner. Even when presenting a valid argument backed up by facts and empathy for other humans, not everyone is going to agree with you – and that’s okay! Arguments are about growth and understanding – not about winning and losing.

Maybe it’s the art of persuasion.

*******************************

Thanks for reading! Did you find any of this helpful? What would you add?