What to do if you want to convince a person

Grandma doesn't want to be vaccinated because she believes in chipping and a world conspiracy. Your child's teacher complains about today's children and is going to ban the wearing of phones. And a colleague suddenly refuses to perform an important task, because “now retrograde mercury». And now you already feel a powerful desire to prove to them all that they are wrong.

But psychologist Adam Grant believesThe Science of Reasoning With Unreasonable People / The New York Timesthat we must act differently.

Consider if it's worth arguing at all

Before pulling out the knives, check: do you really have up-to-date and expert information that you can refer to? Are there any weak points in your judgment? When you operate on unverified information, there is a danger of looking

flat-earther or the Devil's advocate. In this case, it is hardly worth starting an argument.

Second point: Remember that the persuasion process is likely to take time and hassle. Counseling psychologist Holly Weeks advisesR. Knight, H. Weeks. Dealing with difficult people soberly assess your strength. Do you have the physical, mental and emotional opportunity to debate right now? And who is the person you want to argue with? Is it so important for you to convince him?

If we are talking, for example, about a grandmother at the entrance, who complains about today's youth, this is hardly the case when it is worth investing in a conversation. It is quite another matter if the beliefs of your loved one can harm him or someone else. For example, he believes cancer can be cured with baking soda and meditation.

Try to understand your opponent

Get rid of the internal attitude that your interlocutor is a narrow-minded ram. Most likely, he does not hear you, not because he cannot understand the essence of your arguments, but because... he is afraid.

The researchers cameG. J. Trevors, K. R. Muis, R. Pekrun, G. M. Sinatra, P. H. Winne. Identity and Epistemic Emotions During Knowledge Revision: A Potential Account for the Backfire Effect / Discourse Processes to the conclusion that people do not perceive well the facts that threaten their identity, that is, ideas about themselves and connections with some groups (vegans, meat eaters, feminists, prolifers etc).

When a person shares the opinion of the community (for example, “no abortion”), it strengthens his group identity and at the same time puts him in opposition to ideological opponents. But any deviation from the course, as they sayWhy Is It So Hard to Change People's Minds? / Greater Good Magazine specialists, makes him vulnerable and makes him anxious.

But even if the person is not afraid be excluded from some community, he may still be uncomfortable. Psychologist Clifford Lazarus explainsWhy Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds / Psychology Today this phenomenon is a cognitive dissonance. When a person learns some information that does not correspond to the one that he already possesses, this gives rise to a contradiction in his mind.

The first reaction in this situation is protection. In some cases, it can manifest itself as an effectWhen Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions / Political Behavior reverse action, when instead of accepting all your slim evidence, the person becomes even more isolated in its truth. This is because he is trying to regain his inner harmony.

In general, instead of starting your ideological expansion with a thesis that breaks the mold, try to empathize and prepare the person. Create a comfortable atmosphere for him, make sure that you understand him, do not try to destroy his identity, do not want him to feel weak and insecure.

Speak calmly and respectfully

Respectful means not belittling the opponent and his views, showing empathy (back to the previous tip).

In addition, it is not only what you say that matters, but how you do it. Avoid using an aggressive tone and raising your voice. Scientists have found outN. Burra, D. Kerzel, D. M. Tord, D. Grandjean, L. Ceravolo. Early spatial attention deployment toward and away from aggressive voices / Social Cognitive and Affective Neurosciencethat our brain perceives screaming as a potential threat. When a person hears a loud, unpleasant sound, they may feel fear, which motivates him to simply "run away" from the source of danger.

Use Pascal's method

The point is to confirm the correctness of the interlocutor in some aspect, with which you are in solidarity, and then point out the problem areas of judgment. This will give the opponent the impression that he was initially right, he simply could not consider all sides of the issue.

Ask the person to describe their ideal solution to the problem.

Instead of asking why your opponent prefers option X over Y, it’s better to know how he thinks he can solve Problem Z. I came to this conclusionP. M. Fernbach, T. Rogers, C. R. Fox, S. A. Sloman. Political Extremism Is Supported by an Illusion of Understanding / Psychological Science a group of researchers in the United States.

They asked people to describe the ideal system. taxation. When the participants started to reason, they realized the complexity of the problem and noticed gaps in their own knowledge.

A similar experiment was conducted by psychologist Adam Grant. The articleThe Science of Reasoning With Unreasonable People / The New York Times He told The New York Times how he tried to convince his friend to do vaccination against COVID-19.

Try not to use "but"

According toSusan Heitler. The Power of Two: Secrets to a Strong and Loving Marriage clinical psychologist Susan Heitler, “but” is a sign of subtraction in conversation. It erases what has just been said. Therefore, it is better to use other formulations: “at the same time”, “also”, “at the same time”.

Give specific examples

Psychologist Holly Weeks saysR. Knight, H. Weeks. Dealing with difficult people: when you refer to real situations or detail fictional ones, it makes your reasoning more clear and accurate, and companion easier to perceive information.

Don't try to change the whole picture of the world in one conversation.

Entrepreneur and journalist Shane Snow in her book Dream Teams. The team as a single organism "writesShane Snow. Dream Teams. Team as a single organismthat consistency is needed in an argument is the most important and difficult element of a productive discussion. Dodging answers and changing the topic (even if another is also important) will not help in a specific conversation, but will only confuse the opponent.

Remember yourself. What happens when you don’t understand something and cannot grasp the essence in any way? Perhaps at this moment it seems to you that the information that has fallen on you does not in any way line up into a clear picture, and the interlocutor is simply leading you by the nose. Are you feeling annoyed? Fatigue? Reluctance to debate? Or, on the contrary, do you want to defeat him with your arguments?

Be that as it may, it is unlikely that you will be able to convince you. It's the same with your opponent: the more you stray from the topic, the more likely you are to get nowhere. Even to what was originally planned. Let us recall the excellent Russian proverb: "If you chase two hares, you will not catch a single one."

Remember that a person needs time and you are not omnipotent.

Even if you followed all our advice and you still didn't succeed, it's okay. According toThe Science of Reasoning With Unreasonable People / The New York Times Adam Grant, convince someone is a difficult task, because its result depends not only on the convincing one.

Perhaps your opponent just needs time. After all change your views not so easy.