INSIGHTS: the Science of Argumentation

The science of argumentation shows that there are different levels of disagreement, which often leads to people talking past each other and getting stuck.

For example, one person is arguing about which climate change policy to implement, and the other has not accepted that climate change is 1) Real, 2) human-induced, or 3) that it matters as much as other concerns.

The “Status” of a disagreement is the lowest point where people disagree.

It looks like this:

1. Level 1, Facts: e.g. speeding - were you driving faster than the speed limit or not?
2. Level 2, Definition: e.g. category - murder, manslaughter, accident etc
3. Level 3, Value: e.g. climate change is real, but only a few degrees, so it's not a big deal.
4. Level 4, Place: Twitter is not where we need to discuss this. Or, this should be discussed with the Board.
5. Level 5, Policy: we ought to adopt strategy A, not B.

[Prof. David Zarefsky, Professor of argumentation and debate]

According to the theory - whatever level you are discussing means you’ve conceded or assumed others have conceded a lower level.??

If you are struggling to get traction on your strategy [Level 5, Policy], it might be that the person you are discussing the strategy with is sitting at “This is not a problem” [Level 3, Value].

In that case, it isn’t surprising that they are not interested in your strategy to fix a problem they don’t think exists.

Pro-tip -

dial into the status of the discussion, start at the lowest point and build from there.

Nigel

“I am the controller of my own future”

We're all trying to do our best with what we've got.

Achieve success - whatever that means for each of us.

I love what I do because I get to help people make a real difference in what matters to them:

PS Whenever you're ready for a conversation, just book in for a discovery call with me. I look forward to chatting with you.

https://www.nigeldonovan.com