The Web address of this article is http://sfhelp.org/cx/apps/arguer.htm
Clicking links below will open a full window or an
informational popup, so
turn off
your browser's popup blocker or allow popups from this nonprofit, ad-free Web site.
This is one of a
series
of brief articles on how to respond effectively
to annoying social behavior. An "effective response" occurs
when the responder (a) gets their
met
well enough, and (b) both people feel
enough.
This article assumes you're familiar with...
Perspective
Arguing differs from problem-solving in that each person
tries to "win" - so there is a "loser." Do you know a child
or adult who often tries to hook you into a lose-lose
argument or debate ("Yes,
but..."). If so, how do you
feel if
you argue with them? Do you feel heard (vs. agreed with) and
respec-ted? What would you rather do than argue?
The subselves ruling people who argue chronically or
excessively may strive to...
-
replace boredom or painful
self-awareness with external excitement, and/or to...
-
avoid scary
intimacy and self-disclosure, and/or to...
-
reduce ceaseless shame and inferiority by
"winning" every argument and feeling
Each of these suggest the person is ruled by a
well-meaning false self.
|
Few people are aware of false-self domination and wounds,
or know what to do about them. Im-plication -
instead of saying "Rosa loves to argue," or "Rosa always
has to have the last word (or be right),"
it's
probably more accurate and compassionate to say "Rosa
is wounded and ruled by a false self, and she doesn't
know it." |
Possible responses to someone who argues or debates
compulsively include first checking to make sure your
own
or
subselves haven't
your Self. Then get clear on...
Then offer a
hearing check like this...
"So you want me
to understand that (whatever)."
A common effect of a statement (not a question) like
this is to "take the wind out of her/his sails" because
you've just ended the debate by not arguing. Beware - if
you (your false self) use this as a ploy to win,
you'll probably lose.
When you get agreement to your
hearing check ("Yeah..." / a nod / "Right..."), then
your needs respectfully and
firmly, and expect "resistances." For example:
"(Name), I just
need you to hear my point of view. I don't need you
to agree with me (if that's true). Can you give me a
hearing check now?"
Other options...
"(Name), when
you need to argue and debate with me, I eventually
get weary and tune you out. I'd rather
problem-solve, or agree to disagree. Will you do
that?"
"(Name), are
you aware of how often you argue or fight?" If I say
"black," you say "No, white." We never solve
anything, and I don't much feel like debating with
you."
And a follow up to that is - calmly, not
sarcastically...
"(Name), you're
debating (or arguing) again..." You can also
use a neutral hand gesture (like an upraised fist)
that you both know means the same thing.
Expect resistance (e.g. an argument) without
judgment, acknowledge it respectfully with a hear-ing
check, and calmly repeat your assertion as often as
needed. If a partner dismisses or minimizes your
response and need/s, see your response-options to
not listening, aggression,
competition, and
egotism.
Notice your reaction to these options. Are you
motivated to try them? How do they compare with
your usual reaction to argumentative people? Recall our
(or your)
of "an effective re-sponse to a problem
partner."
Here's another option...
The "I'm Right!" Exercise
Are
there kids or adults in your
life with whom you "argue?"
Do each of you get focused
on "winning," getting "your
way," and/or "being right"?
In most cases, such contests
are lose-lose, because both
combatants feel
disrespected, unheard, and
frustrated. Better options
are win-win problem-solving,
or - in the case of *values*
conflicts - agreeing
respectfully to disagree.
Try this safe, powerful way
to illustrate the silliness
and futility of "I'm right!
No, I am!" battles:
-
Agree you have a power
struggle, without blame
or guilt;
-
Stand and face your
partner from about 12"
away. Each of you make
an "L" shape with your
right arm so your
forearms are vertical
and touching.
-
Clasp your right hands
gently, and hold
comfortable eye contact.
-
One of you start by
saying with some
firmness "I'm
right." As you
do, rotate both your
arms leftward to
horizontal. Don't use
physical strength and
don't resist - this is
not a physical contest.
Do not smile.
-
With steady eye contact,
the second person says
"No, *I'M*
right!" and
rotates both your arms
rightward 180 degrees to
horizontal.
-
The first person says
more forcefully
"NO! I Am
RIGHT!" and
rotates both arms back
180 degrees to
horizontal.
-
Repeat this sequence
four or more times,
escalating the tone and
power of your voice and
the speed of
arm-rotation each time.
Keep steady eye contact,
and don't joke or grin.
-
See what you feel and
think, and discuss
this together as
teammates. Usually
you'll both wind up
laughing...
This
exercise vividly illustrates
(vs. explains) the
pointlessness of arguing -
i.e. trying to persuade each
other "You're wrong and I'm
right!" A variation is to
say "I (did 'x'" and rotate)
and the other person says
"No, you didn't," and
rotates back) Try that for
6-8 times, and see what you
feel... This exercise can be
specially helpful with
stubborn (insecure and/or
bored) kids.
Recap
This is one of a series of brief articles suggesting
effective ways to respond to common social
behaviors. This article
offers ways to respond to an argumentative or
combative person without gettin g into a lose-lose
power struggle. The options are
based on your...
-
putting your Self in
charge of your personality,
-
maintaining a mutual
respect attitude,
-
being clear on your
feelings, needs, and personal Rights, and...
-
fluency in the
relationship skills of awareness, assertion, and
empathic listening.
The article also
illustrates a useful exercise demonstrating the
silliness of arguing.
+ + +
Pause, breathe, and reflect - why did you read this
article? Did you get what you needed? If not, what
you need? Who's
these questions - your
or
