Chapter 15 The fourth article strategizes and builds a strategic plan

★Be preemptive and strive for the initiative As the saying goes, the opportunity cannot be lost, the time never comes, and the opportunity is often fleeting. Therefore, the debater should choose the best time and the best atmosphere, and launch a fierce attack on the weakness or key point of the opponent in order to obtain the best debate effect.There are two types of preemptive strikes and late strikes in grasping the opportunity to strike. Here we will first talk about preemptive strikes.Preemptive attack is to get ahead of the opponent in terms of time, grasp the key point of the opponent's proposition, take advantage of the opponent's unpreparedness, use sudden attacks and indomitable momentum to defeat the opponent's psychological defense, and win in one fell swoop.

◎The significance of striving for the initiative Whether in debates, negotiations, or other language communication processes, striving for the initiative is the fundamental means to win and achieve your goals.As the saying goes: the first to strike first.Arguing with sharp tongues is just like a war of swords and swords. You should strive for the initiative, and take advantage of the opponent's unpreparedness or unpreparedness to strike first to gain the advantage of the opportunity and achieve the purpose of controlling the opponent.Preemptive attack is a debate strategy to win first.

Once, in a competition debate titled "What is the praise and criticism of traditional Chinese opera paired with electronic music?", as soon as the free debate started, the affirmative took the lead in attacking. Zheng Fang: "Just now you emphasized repeatedly that you will lose the traditional things by doing so. May I ask, what is the specific content of the opera tradition?" Opposition: "After the traditional Beijing opera art is added to electronic music, I can't see the traditional taste of Peking opera. As for what the tradition of Peking opera is, I don't know. I can't answer the reform of Peking opera. Because I It was never considered."

Zhengfang: "Since you have admitted that you don't know what is the tradition of Peking Opera, and what is lost after adding electronic music, we can't continue to debate with you. If you can't answer, we won't force you to answer." The second argument of the positive party: "I will give a satisfactory answer to the question thrown back by the other party. We believe that the traditional characteristics of traditional Peking Opera art have three aspects: the first lies in its freehand brushwork. The second is its fixed performance. The third is its fixed singing voice. As I said just now, the extensive expressiveness of electronic music fully complements the lack of masculinity and femininity in the three major accompaniments of Peking Opera. That is to say, the addition of electronic music does not destroy Peking Opera. It does not destroy its fixed performance program and singing, but makes Peking Opera art more in line with the appreciation habits and psychological needs of modern people. Why don't we applaud this kind of reform and try to applaud it? What about pouring cold water?"

Here, the affirmative begins with "ask" and ends with "ask", pointing directly to the crux of the opponent's argument, and "which pot is not opened and which pot to lift", which falls into the situation where the enemy is at a loss for reason.After that, he turned his back on the client and answered the questions that the other party couldn't answer, and based on this, he started to demonstrate his own point of view, which was well-founded.It can be seen that if you take the lead in launching an attack, aim at the key point, and question, the other party will avoid answering, or it is difficult to answer, and you will fall into a passive state.

After the "Xi'an Incident" was peacefully resolved, Zhang Xueliang did not follow the Communist Party's advice and sent Chiang Kai-shek back to Nanjing, but was detained by Chiang Kai-shek. When the young officers in the Northeast Army learned that Zhang Xueliang had been detained by Chiang Kai-shek, they vented their hatred against Chiang Kai-shek on the senior generals of the Northeast Army, and mistakenly believed that the Communist Party had not rescued their commander.After assassinating several senior generals of the Northeast Army, they broke into the residence of Comrade Zhou Enlai in a murderous manner.

At this critical juncture, Zhou Enlai remained calm.He suddenly stood up and slammed the table, preemptively said: "What are you going to do? Are you trying to save Deputy Commander Zhang? Your actions are precisely helping Chiang Kai-shek! Chiang Kai-shek welcomes it! Can you rescue your Deputy Commander Zhang and come back? No! This is exactly what killed Deputy Commander Zhang! Because your actions have broken the unity and split the Northeast Army! You are committing a crime!" In the face of a group of murderous people, Zhou Enlai was not afraid, nor did he patiently persuade him.As a result, not only their prestige and arrogance were dispelled, but they were moved to tears and knelt down to confess their mistakes to Zhou Enlai.

◎Find the right time to take the initiative When Sun Yat-sen lived in Japan in 1897, he met the Japanese politician Inukai Takeshi, and they had an interesting discussion. Inukai Takeshi: "I really admire your wit—however, I want to ask you, Mr. Son, what is your favorite?" Sun Yat-sen: "Revolution, to overthrow the Qing government." Inukai Takeshi: "You like revolution, that's well known. But other than that, what's your favorite thing?" Sun Yat-sen paused for a moment and replied in English: "Woman (woman)." Inuyang Takeshi clapped his hands and said, "Very good! What's next?"

Sun Yat-sen: "Book (book)." Inuyang Yi couldn't help laughing: "This is a very honest statement. I thought you would say that you like books the most, but you put women in front of the books. This is very interesting. You are so patient with women It’s really amazing to study hard because of the love of my mother!” Quan Yangyi thought he had discovered a secret, and at this moment he lifted his psychological guard.Sun Yat-sen chose this opportunity to explain the meaning of his answer: "No! I think that for thousands of years, women have always been men's accessories or playthings, at best they can be a good wife. However, I think she should be the same as her mother. Synonymous, when a mother feeds her child with the most nutritious milk in her body, when a wife dedicates her sincere love to her husband, their sacrifices are so selfless and noble, isn’t this worthy of love? , Many of us do not cherish this kind of love and trample on it.”

Here, Sun Yat-sen uses ambiguity to transfer semantics, interprets "women" as women including mothers and wives, and understands "love" as respect, love, cherish, and admiration in a broad sense. convinced the other side.In addition to this point, Mr. Sun Yat-sen's order of "Woman" and "Book" also shows that Mr. Sun Yat-sen has an accurate grasp of the fighter. As the saying goes, opportunities never come, never come again.If a debater wants to win the debate, he must be good at grasping the fleeting opportunity, choose the best place, the best time, the best atmosphere, and launch a fierce attack in one go, so as to achieve the best debate effect.The method of grasping the opportunity is a method to capture the most favorable opportunity for debate.

In February 1504, during Columbus's last expedition, they stayed in Jamaica, where he occupied.Due to the lack of ships, there was no hope of returning, so they had to continue to be besieged there.Originally relying on the tribute of the local Indians to maintain their livelihood, however, due to the rebellion under Columbus, the prestige of Columbus was greatly reduced, and the Indians were not as afraid of the irresistible Columbus who was regarded as a god and demon as before, and the regular tribute was interrupted. , it can be said that Columbus was caught in internal and external troubles.He struggled to find a way to restore his former majesty to the hearts of the Indians.The method was finally found.Columbus calculated that a total lunar eclipse would occur locally on the evening of February 19 of that year. He realized that this was the best or only time to subdue these Indians who lacked astronomical knowledge and blindly worshiped gods. In the evening, Columbus called all the Indians to wait on the empty beach. He himself stood tall on the stern tower, with a solemn expression and prophesied to the Indians in the name of the prophet: "Listen, you must respect God, if you Don't continue to provide us white people with food, you will face a disaster. God will take the moon back to heaven tonight in order to punish you for disrespecting us white people. If you still don't think about repenting, even greater disasters will come On the heads of you devil-obsessed Indians." At this time, the moon was still high in the sky, and the Indians did not take Columbus' threats seriously.Soon, the lunar eclipse began, and as the moon was gradually eclipsed, the sky and sea became darker and darker.The Indians fell into fear and begged God for forgiveness.When Columbus saw that he was done, he readily agreed and pretended to pray to the sky. With the end of the total lunar eclipse, another round of bright moon hung high in the sky.The Indians had to resume their tribute to Columbus. The beauty of Columbus' victory is that he found the best time for a total lunar eclipse that can give the Indians a huge deterrent. Fighter opportunities are trends and gaps that appear in a certain time and space that are beneficial to oneself but not conducive to the opponent. Grasping fighter opportunities is the key to defeating opponents and changing the situation.The timeliness of fighter jets is very strong.Specifically, in the course of the debate, if one's own side is in an advantageous position, it must seize the opportunity to quickly gather troops when the other side is not on guard, and give the other side a sudden attack to subdue it. This is preemptive strike; on the contrary, When encountering a situation where the enemy is strong and we are weak, and the enemy is superior and we are inferior, it will be difficult to win if you fight hastily. At this time, you might as well watch the changes in the situation quietly, avoid their enthusiasm, carefully look for the opponent's flaws, fully prepare your own arguments, and take the opportunity Accumulate strength, then choose the right time, and win the battle in one fell swoop. ◎In the face of rebuttals, pre-emptive strikes The general purpose of all debates is nothing more than to refute the opponent and win the battle.However, analyzing the specific situation of the debate, the nature of the debate is different, and the direct goal of the rebuttal should also be different.According to the nature of the debate, the purpose of refutation can be roughly divided into the following categories: 1. Take the lead in attacking and put the opponent to death This is the highest level of rebuttal. When you attack the opponent's vital point and make the opponent speechless and convinced, your side will win. 2. Take the lead in attacking and disturb the opponent's front In the face of the opponent's offensive, one's own side organizes an effective counter-offensive, aiming to frustrate its offensive and vigor, shake its psychological defense, and cause internal imbalance and chaos. 3. Be the first to attack and consume the opponent's time In some debates, debate winners and losers are tied to time.In this case, if an attack is organized and the opponent is forced to respond by asking questions first, then a long passive response will invisibly consume the opponent's time, thus gaining precious time for the opponent. 4. Take the lead in attacking the judges and audience Rebuttal language is an art, while offensive language is sharp, brilliant, and full of wisdom, which is pleasing to the audience, can show the tact and charm of the debater, and can also win the audience and judges. After World War II, many countries in Asia demanded compensation from Japan for war losses.When Indonesian President Sukarno paid a state visit to Japan, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida estimated that Sukarno might also raise the issue of war compensation, so he took a pre-emptive approach. Yoshida Mao said to Sukarno with a happy face: "I have been looking forward to your visit. Your country always blows typhoons towards us, which has caused serious losses to Japan. I have been waiting for you to come, so that I can ask you to compensate your country. The damage caused by the typhoon to our country.” Saying so, Yoshida Shigeru laughed out loud.Sukarno was dumbfounded and speechless.He decided not to raise the issue of war reparations. Shigeru Yoshida calculated like a god, he guessed what Sukarno was thinking, so he seized the opportunity, changed the topic, and pre-empted the attack.For Yoshida Shigeru's very connotative clever words, Sukarno knew the meaning behind the words, so it was difficult to make a request. The technique of preemptive strike is used in debates, with "preemptive strike" as the means and "controlling others" as the purpose, it is necessary to seize the commanding heights first and seize the initiative in the debate. Here are a few things to keep in mind when using the "preemptive strike" technique: (1) The discussion of viewpoints must be comprehensive and accurate, and the analysis and demonstration of the topic must grasp the essence and avoid entanglement in side issues. (2) The use of language should be close to the topic, be able to grasp the emotions of the audience, and avoid talking about yourself, regardless of the audience's reaction. (3) In the analysis of the problem, attention should be paid to the synthesis of multiple aspects and angles, and a comprehensive discussion, so as to avoid blindly talking about the big truth according to the positive thinking, and extending along one thinking. ★Strategic attack varies from person to person In the debate, grasp the pulse of the other party's ideological activities through language, and follow the heart with words; capture the subtle changes in the other party's thoughts by examining the other party's behavior and demeanor, and observe and analyze; understand the other party, be familiar with the other party, know yourself and the enemy, and know the wise man; Different objects adopt different ways of debating, and arguing depends on the person. This is the art of "different words vary from person to person" in the art of debate. ◎Be good at observing words and expressions in debates Ideological activities are closely related to language, manners and expressions.Therefore, we must be good at observing colors and analyzing thoughts in debates.There are two methods: 1. Be good at grasping the critical moment It is impossible for any debater, including many superb ones, to be absolutely impeccable in covering up his expression.The key question is whether you can accurately determine which change is decisive among the intricate changes in the other party's expression.For a witty debater, his ability to make up for his mistakes is also very superb. It is impossible for him to allow you to see his flaws for a long time. Therefore, opportunities are very precious to you.As for what exactly is the specific manifestation of this "decisive moment" and how to identify and hold on to it, it can only be determined by analyzing the specific situation and relying on your experience and feeling, and there is no fixed pattern to follow.Indeed, although people's thoughts and feelings will be revealed in their speech, expression, and actions, it is not enough to accurately grasp the opponent from the above two aspects.Because people not only have natural attributes, but also have social attributes.Therefore, we must not forget that people have self-control ability, which can restrict and control their own speech and behavior.The self-control ability of a good orator is particularly prominent.This requires us to combine the other party's history, experience, theory and eloquence level to make comprehensive thinking, in-depth research and accurate judgment. Therefore, the understanding of the object of debate should not be limited to silent observation, but also active reconnaissance, and certain reconnaissance countermeasures should be taken to stimulate the other party's emotions, so as to quickly grasp the other party's thoughts and trends.For example, before the debate begins, you can chat with the other party about philosophy, economy, fashion, housing, society and other topics in order to observe the other party's interests, hobbies, knowledge, experience, etc.If the other party is bored, you don't have to worry about it. Apart from disturbing his mood before the debate, there is no other disadvantage.Use the things the other party is interested in to induce the other party to speak, observe the changes in the other party's expression, the general characteristics of mental activities and the location of language points, and judge the other party's intentions from them.In addition, properly use a series of stimulating questions in the debate to arouse the excitement of the other party, and then lose control of their emotions, making them reveal their inner world.And before you have a thorough understanding of the opponent's character, you can make him mistakenly think that you are cowardly and weak, so that his control over his expression will be relaxed, and the time for you to observe him will come.In short, it is necessary to quickly and accurately capture the clues exposed by the opponent, and see through the opponent's treachery through the phenomenon. 2. Personality Orientation and Language Point Orientation Observation and analysis is actually a process of capturing and judging the subtle changes and meanings of the opponent's speech, behavior, expression, and expression. It is a process of "from the outside to the inside".Personality orientation and the positioning of language points are the first step in this process.Personality orientation is to grasp the other person's personality type through observation and analysis of their expressions, speech, and behavior.You can throw out one or two very sensitive questions of the other party, and wait and see how and how much he responds.It is worth noting that this kind of observation must be meticulous, and never conclude that the other party is a fool just because he seems to be unresponsive.Just like watching a tragedy, some people shed tears, while others were numb. You cannot say that those who are numb are not moved.Because the numbness and silence at this time is a kind of numbness and silence of "silence is better than sound at this time" and "listen to thunder in the silent place".After understanding the other party's personality type, we must try to capture the typical actions and typical parts that best reflect his ideological activities, that is, "the positioning of the language point".Eyes, hands, legs, feet, and even the muscles of every part of the body may be the "language point".The meaning of some phenomena is very clear to everyone, such as trembling of legs, it is mostly a manifestation of a leisurely mood; eyebrows raised upside down, eyes wide open, are a symbol of anger; and slightly frowning, biting lips, is thinking meaning. ◎Think in another person's place and help the other party speak For example, if you are selling an electric fan, and customers are more picky about this product, and claim that it is okay to buy an electric fan, you have to follow the other party's meaning and say, "This product is really not good, so spend so much money to buy it." It’s not worth it to find something you don’t like!” As soon as this kind of words came out, the other party felt as if he was pushing a door hard, and the door suddenly disappeared, and he couldn’t use his strength, because even if he had any dissatisfaction, , I also feel that there is no need to say it. Next, you can take advantage of the situation to change, and say in a tone that you imagined for the other party: (1) Electric fans generally have this problem. (2) Although this summer is not too hot, electric fans are still useful. (3) If you don't care about the price, you can buy a better one. In such a conversation, the other party will treat you as a person who helps to make up your mind, and the instinctive wariness of the salesman disappears, so it is easy to make a purchase decision and sign the order easily and happily. From a certain point of view, the salesman's skill is to speak, that is, to be eloquent when speaking with customers.The analysis of salesman's speech can help other groups of people think deeply about how to speak well. In daily life, people generally form a prejudice against salesmen, thinking that none of their words are true, and sales will inevitably have the water of bragging.This is why there is little effect in widely publicizing the product.And when the salesman appears as a bosom friend, good at dealing with the customer's objection, grasping the customer's buying signal, the customer will be moved and persuaded. When buyers criticize the products you are selling, you have to pretend to forget your sales mission and speak on the side of the other party. ◎Be considerate of the other party is a shortcut to persuade the other party A story between Chen Yi and Sukarno is a good example. In April 1964, Marshal Chen Yi, then Chinese Foreign Minister, led a delegation to Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, to attend the preparatory meeting for the second Asian-African Conference.As soon as he met with Indonesian President Sukarno, he found that the two sides had different opinions: according to Sukarno's intention, the location of the second Asian-African Conference was still in Bandung, Indonesia, and the time was set in that year; The Asian-African Conference has already been held in Bandung, and the second Asian-African Conference should be held in an African country. The opinions of the two sides were inconsistent, which laid the fuse of the dispute for the preparatory meeting. In order to persuade Sukarno without losing harmony, to achieve the goal of seeking common ground and broadly uniting international friends, Chen Yi said to President Sukarno: "There are as many as 40 independent countries in Africa. It is to support the struggle in Africa, so that you stand tall, see far, take into account the overall situation, show the demeanor of a statesman, and prove that you have no self-interest, and you can speak loudly when you speak.” Sukarno thinks it makes sense , but he seems to be in the way of sympathy, although he nodded in agreement, he was unwilling to completely give up his point of view, and still insisted on opening it back then.Marshal Chen Yi found that the problem had turned around, so he struck while the iron was hot, and said in a humorous language: "You are the president, I am the marshal, and I will be your chief of staff. Do you want it?" Such a gentle and deliberative language not only took care of Su's sympathy, respected the status of the host, but also fully reflected the Bandung spirit of seeking unity. Naturally, Sukarno could not refuse and could only say yes. Considering the other party is a shortcut to persuade the other party.In some special occasions, even if there is a momentary difference of opinion, we still might as well advise each other to prevent the smell of gunpowder of disagreement, so as to create a relaxed and humorous atmosphere, and solve problems through friendly discussions. ◎The magical effect of arguing according to the person Debating according to the person is to use different methods of debate for different debaters, judges and audiences in order to persuade the other party and win support from various sources.Only in this way can the best debate effect be achieved. Debates are always held in a specific environment and place. The emotional tendency of the audience present will have a certain impact on the psychology of the debaters and even the outcome. If you want to gain the understanding and support of the audience, you must study their emotions. Social background, customs and habits, cultural level and psychological characteristics, etc. The first International Chinese College Debate was held in Singapore.During the Second World War, Japan brought great suffering to the people of Southeast Asia, and the Japanese government still tries to cover up and distort this history, so the people of Southeast Asia always have emotional estrangement from Japan.According to the emotional characteristics of the people of Southeast Asia, in the debate on "Food and clothing are necessary conditions for morality", the Fudan University team on the opposing side made this argument: "Isn't Japan considered to be the richest country in the world? But there are endless political scandals. Nobori Takeshita was kicked off the stage by bribery, Ryosuke Uno was lured into the water by beauty, and Nobu Kanemaru? After all, he failed to win the trust of the people." (Applause.) ,laughter) In the face of the Southeast Asian people who were once deeply harmed by Japan, exposing the scandals in Japanese political circles will undoubtedly produce excellent results.The defense also cleverly uses homonym, which is very humorous and satirical. In the debate competition, the weight of the judges is very heavy. In the debate, not only should the judges be respected, but also the cultural background, theoretical views and psychological characteristics of the judges should be considered. Generally, they should not criticize their writings during the competition. Citing some of their theoretical viewpoints will virtually increase the judges' sense of identification with their own arguments. In the finals of the first International Chinese College Debate, the famous master of martial arts novels, Mr. Jin Yong, was one of the judges. Therefore, the Fudan University team quoted Jin Yong’s works when demonstrating their point of view that "human nature is inherently evil": "Fellow Fang, do you still want to talk about the inherent goodness of human nature in front of the four villains in the world, namely full of evil, omnipotent, vicious, and extremely vicious?" (Applause, laughter) Jin Yong is sitting on the judges' table, and everyone loves his martial arts novels very much. In this way, the situation, rationality and interest are blended together, and the balance will naturally fall to the Fudan University team. Of course, you should be cautious when citing the judges' theoretical viewpoints, not far-fetched, let alone flattery, otherwise the effect will be counterproductive. ◎Several ways to defend yourself Debate according to person is to adopt different ways of argument according to different people or different situations of the same person.Specifically, there are the following ways of defending people. 1. Debating with wise men should quote from many sources The so-called wise men refer to those who are quick-thinking, clever and intelligent.When arguing with such a person, you must quote from many sources to show your knowledge and talents.Because smart people tend to look down on others, and only admire people who are smarter and more knowledgeable than themselves.They are also very interested in knowledge-based topics. They use blogs as evidence to win the credibility of their opponents, and it is easy to convince them.If he feels that your level and knowledge are mediocre, and you debate with him, he rejects your opinion because of a kind of vanity. Even if he knows that your words are reasonable and the opinion is advisable, he will not willingly admit defeat. 2. Use more metaphors when arguing with dull people If your opponent in the debate is a dull, little-informed person, you don't need to show your erudition, but try to state and explain the problem of the debate clearly.These people's comprehension, acceptance and response are poor, so you have to find a way to explain the truth clearly and easily.These people will not listen to your lectures very patiently, so it is advisable to use metaphors to explain the truth vividly and patiently. 3. Pay attention to defense when arguing with eloquent speakers In an argument, sometimes although the truth is in your hands, the opponent is a person who is good at eloquence, and it is extremely difficult to persuade him.At this time, you should use the "shou" technique instead. First of all, you must keep it secret from beginning to end, and never let the other party see that you are anxious about "can't win the argument", and try to maintain a calm and calm demeanor, neither agitated nor indifferent.Let the opponent can neither say that you are not interested in the reasons he said, but he cannot see where your real interest lies.At this time, you have to give full play to your self-control and rely on it to win.Be especially cautious in your speech, and speak carefully and securely, without any flaws.If there are mistakes and omissions at this time, the eloquent opponent will take advantage of the vacancy and attack. Second, wait for attack.Use the method of asking more questions to practice self-defense.It is best to ask more difficult questions and question the opponent repeatedly, so that the opponent is busy thinking about answers and has no time to attack.You wait for work with ease, wait and see what happens, catch his mistakes, and wait for an opportunity to fight back.Or use the method of continuously strengthening one's own "fortress" to weaken the opponent's offensive, stick to the principles and viewpoints of being invincible, and make the opponent unable to attack for a long time, exhausting his mind. The core of Yinyishu is one is to know people and wise people, and the other is to make arguments according to people. If you grasp these two points, you can correctly grasp and use this technique. 4. Use detours when arguing with older people The so-called elders refer to people who are older than themselves, have higher seniority, higher positions, and greater prestige than themselves.Although we pay attention to equality in treating these elders, we must respect them in terms of reason, ethics, and emotion.However, for various reasons, they cannot be right all the time, which inevitably leads to arguments and debates.The biggest obstacle in arguing with these people is that the debater respects them too much and it is difficult to speak.Or the other party relies on his prestige and is domineering, forcing the debater to be unable to speak.Therefore, the way of argumentation should be "qu".The so-called "qu" refers to the use of circuitous debate techniques.If you are embarrassed to say it clearly, you can say it aside; if you dare not say it clearly, you can say it in secret;Through circuitous and tortuous ways, input one's point of view into the subconscious mind of the other party without showing any traces, so that he can be convinced with reason and sincerity, or secretly convinced.Let them feel that although they accept your opinion, their self-esteem has not been hurt. 5. Debate with younger people to show the good side The so-called inferior refers to those who are younger than themselves in age and seniority, and whose status and prestige are lower than themselves.When arguing with such people, you should pay attention to making full use of the demeanor of the elders to be good at arguing.If you want to subdue your opponent by relying on the aura of dominance, you will either refuse to accept it, or it will backfire.Because even if it is a debate, the right and wrong, right and wrong of the issues discussed in the debate are not necessarily conclusive.Therefore, when debating, the elders should realize that "the one who is yes may not be, and the one who is not may be yes".When debating, you should not use power to overwhelm others, you must downplay the "official" spirit, and oppose the official style of domineering debate.You can't "righteousness means reason", pretending to be the ruler, seeing the subordinates as "people" and yourself as "lord", domineering, this will block the way of speech.Instead, use a peaceful, rational attitude. 6. When debating with someone who complains, let him vent first When you meet a complaining opponent in a debate, the most suitable debate technique is to let the opponent vent his grievances first, and you should listen patiently to the opponent's venting.Sometimes, when your opponent comes to you to vent, they just want to vent their anger, and they don't expect to solve anything.If you know the intention of the other party, you don't have to argue with him, let him vent first.If the opponent is full of resentment and asks you to solve a certain problem, you must remember to let the person vent.If the other party has resentment but has not vented it, you must first find a way to tease him to vent and stimulate him to vent.The more he vented, the closer the problem came to being resolved.Because after a person's internal grievances can be vented, the psychological dissatisfaction has been resolved, the desire to vent has been satisfied, and the remaining problems are not difficult to solve.Moreover, in the process of venting, the other party often unconsciously reveals the real reason of dissatisfaction, which provides you with information to solve the problem, and you can find a breakthrough point of persuasion from it. ★Turn defense into offense, fight back In some situations where the enemy is strong and we are weak, when defense alone is not enough to preserve ourselves, we must grasp the contradictions of the enemy, turn defense into offense, turn disadvantage into advantage, change passivity into initiative, and strive for the commanding heights of the debate. Put the enemy to death in one fell swoop. ◎Use verbal clarification to attack the opponent Students from a certain place started a debate on the topic "Warlords also need literary talents". The opposite side thinks that military generals do not need literary talents, the reason is that "the talent of military generals lies in commanding and fighting, and learning literature is to make use of weaknesses and avoid strengths." The affirmative rebutted by using the method of drawing salary from the bottom of the pot: "In the ocean of knowledge, every kind of knowledge and skill is not isolated. The same is true for military talent and literary talent. Military talent relies on literary talent to summarize, communicate, and improve, while literary talent depends on military talent. Provide content to identify authenticity. A senior military commander once listed the various benefits of generals’ learning literature: one is that the practical experience of military training or fighting can be summed up as a theory, which is convenient for academic exchanges and for people to learn from; Keep making progress and prevent empiricism; the third is to cultivate a deep, rigorous and meticulous style of work, and avoid carelessness; the fourth is to strengthen ideological cultivation in the process of studying literature and develop the habit of diligent thinking; In addition, there are tensions and relaxations in work. These are all experiences." Through this rebuttal, the argument of the opposing side that "the talent of a military general lies in commanding and fighting, and learning literature is to make use of weaknesses and avoid strengths" was refuted, and the thesis of the affirmative that "a military general also needs literary talent" was established. When the other party's argument is not closely related to the topic or runs counter to the topic, we can also adopt the method of drawing fire from the bottom to fundamentally correct the foothold of the other party's argument, rectify the name of some concepts, restore their origins, and restore them to their original positions, so that they are just Our opinion service.Strong persuasiveness, strong shocking power, and most importantly, high credibility. When Li Dazhao, China's first Marxist, was tried in court, the judge said murderously: "Li Dazhao, listen: you lacked education since you were a child, and you were dishonest when you were a teenager. You were born rebellious and opposed the government everywhere. After you set foot in society, you have never stopped for a day..." Li Dazhao asked very calmly: "Your Honor, what you said are all exaggerated words. What kind of rebellion, stop, what kind of crime is this?" He then countered with a smile, "I want to interrogate you? There is evidence. You, the presiding judge He Fenglin, once collaborated with Zhang Zuolin to murder 376 people at one time, committing the heinous crime of murder..." He Fenglin's face was livid with anger, his lips trembled, and he said violently: "You are not allowed to talk nonsense!" Li Dazhao judged the situation, seized the opportunity, and refuted in time, with extraordinary results. We also need to get out of the “either-or” shackles.If you answer questions passively with fixed thinking, it will be difficult to jump out of the "either-or" frame setting.By jumping out of the "either-or" frame, you can draw from the bottom of the pot and overthrow the correctness of the other party as the default option. In a debate about "ideology and morality should adapt to (beyond) the market economy", both the opposition and the affirmative have put on a winning posture. In the first round, the opposing side said: "Is Lei Feng's spirit the spirit of selfless dedication or the spirit of equivalent exchange?" , but it doesn’t mean that everything is exchanged, Lei Feng has not thought of exchange, of course, Lei Feng’s spirit can’t be said to be equivalent.” In the second round, the counter side said: "So the core of our ideology and morality is the spirit of serving the people, or the spirit of seeking profit?" The positive side said: "Isn't serving the people a requirement of the market economy?" Zhengfang won warm applause. ◎Use actions to turn defense into offense In many cases, problems that are difficult to express clearly only by verbal discussion can be solved with the help of some specific actions.This is because action behavior is highly intuitive, its truth and falsehood can be verified on the spot, and it has unquestionable eloquent power. One day, Mr. Li's house lost a pig weighing more than 60 kilograms. He suspected that a man named Ai Donggua from a neighboring village had stolen it, so the lawsuit went to the county government.After hearing the plaintiff's complaint, the magistrate asked the defendant whether it was true. The dwarf winter melon said: "Pigs walk slowly. People who steal pigs are afraid of being discovered, so they dare not drive pigs away on the ground, so when they steal, they always carry pigs on their shoulders. You see, the villain is skinny and has no hands." With the power of a chicken, how can you steal this fat pig?" The county magistrate looked at him for a while and said, "That's true. I heard that you have always been innocent and that your family is poor. How about this? Now I will reward you with 10,000 yuan and start a small business when you go home. Don't let me down." A painstaking effort." When the short winter melon got the money, he kowtowed to thank him again and again. After sorting out the money, he quickly put it on his shoulders and turned to go. The magistrate shouted: "Slow down! Defendant, this ten thousand yuan is more than 60 catties!" The short wax gourd was taken aback for a moment, weighed it and said, "Well, almost." The magistrate sneered and said, "Since you said that you have no strength to restrain a chicken, why do you carry such a heavy amount of money on your back like it doesn't weigh much? It can be seen that you can carry a 60-jin pig." Dwarf Wintermelon couldn't deny it, so he had to confess his crime. Sometimes we may directly point out the falseness of the other party's arguments, but when the situation is still unclear, we can create conditions to expose the false arguments of the other party.The essential point is to use some kind of action behavior as the argument, and at the same time supplement it with a certain language description for argumentation. 古代的一个县令这天接到一桩案子，一人状告另一人欠债不还，并有一张写有“宣统二年六月三十日，借银子五百两整”字样的借据为证。经核对笔迹，借据上的字迹与被告的字迹完全一样，被告只得表示如数偿还。 就在县令正要结案判决时，忽然太史到堂。太史一看借据便说：“借据分明有假，怎能草草结案？大家看，这张借据的日期写的是宣统2年6月30日，查这年6月并没有30日，写债据时哪能这样粗心？可见是追填的日期。即使这张借据真的是被告写的，而原告没有发现这一点，债据也是无效的，你们说是不是这样？” 有人把万年历拿来一查，果然和太史说的一样。后经反复审问，原告供出了实情，原来这张债据是原告用一百两银子贿赂一个善于冒充别人笔迹的人写的。 原告于是被监禁了一年。 以事实驳倒对方的论据，对方的论点自然也就站不住脚了。 有个强盗，抢了一个老太婆的东西。一个过路人听见老太婆大喊抓强盗，于是拼命追赶，把强盗抓住了。可是强盗反咬一口，扭住这个过路人说对方是强盗。当时天快黑了，也不知道强盗到底是哪个，于是他们来到县衙，请官府断定。 县令见了，却笑着说：“两人一起赛跑，先跑出凤阳门的就不是盗贼。” 两个人于是开跑。一会儿，他们回到县令身边，县令严肃地对那个后出凤阳门的人说：“盗贼如果跑得快，就不会被人家抓住。现在被人家抓住了，可见盗贼是跑得慢的那个。现在你跑不过人家，被人家抓住了，可见你是真正的盗贼，你为什么还要诬陷人家呢？” 跑得慢的人无奈，只好如实招供，把抢来的东西还给了那个老太婆。 要想取得预期的论辩效果，就必须注意动作行为与自己的推断有逻辑联系。 ◎注意好守和攻的关系 战国初期，楚平王荒淫无道，在大臣费无极的怂恿下父纳子妻，把秦哀公的长妹孟嬴纳入宫中。平王怕事情败露，不可收拾，又听信了费无极的坏主意，把太子建调离京师，派往城父去镇守。临行前平王假惺惺地命令奋扬负责保卫太子，并嘱咐说：“你侍奉太子就要像侍奉我一样。” 次年，孟嬴为平王生了一个儿子，平王许诺要立其为“太子”以接王位，但又碍于太子建还健在。费无极看出了楚平王的心思，便趁机造谣说：“太子建与伍奢合谋勾结齐晋两国兴兵造反，以雪被平王夺妻之恨。” 荒淫昏庸的平王听信了谗言，便密令奋扬“杀太子受上赏，纵太子当死”。奋扬痛恨平王荒淫无道，滥杀无辜，便把子王的密令报告太子，让太子赶快逃走。然后自缚去见平王，并报告说：“太子已逃走，我是来请罪的。” 平王听后大怒，喝问道：“命令是我下的，只有你知道，究竟是谁告诉太子建逃走的？” 奋扬直言不讳：“是我如实地向太子建报告的。” 平王一听，气得暴跳如雷，恨不得挥刀劈了他，呵斥道：“你既然放走了太子，却又来见我，难道不怕要按抗君之罪论处吗？” 奋扬毫无惧色，从容答道：“我前往城父之时，大王命令我'像侍奉大王一样来侍奉太子'，我是奉了您的命令，像救大王一样救了太子！我没有罪，有什么可怕的呢？如果大王责备我不遵从您后来的命令，加罪于我而把我杀掉，我是为救太子而被杀的，虽死犹荣，又有什么可怕的呢？更何况我了解太子并没有造反的形迹，我们无辜地杀害无罪之人，即使我无罪而被杀，虽死无愧，又有什么可怕的呢？太子无罪而逃生了，比我的生命更有价值，我就是死了也甘心，又有什么可怕的呢？” 奋扬的一番话使平王十分感动，便赦免了他，仍然让他任城父的司马。 奋扬对平王的辩白，反守为攻，步步为营，四个“不怕”，据理自辩，立足主动，稳扎稳打地层层辩驳，终于使昏庸之王深感惭愧，改变初衷。 运用反守为攻术，要注意好“守”与“攻”的关系，以守争取时间，等待时机，一旦条件成熟，奋起反击，决不手软。 ★正面进攻，直截了当 说话或者论辩的技巧和反技巧实在太多，不仅需要浪费我们太多的时间，而且把说话或者论辩的简洁之美破坏殆尽，效果还并不见得明显。尤其是在论辩中，当双方都掌握了那些技巧和反技巧，论辩者往往就会心力交瘁，甚至会陷入技巧的圈子而忘记了论辩的目的。更何况绝大多数人都喜欢直率的表达，对单刀直入的表达难以拒绝，讨厌那种拐弯抹角、吞吞吐吐、欲言又止的过分含蓄。 所谓针锋相对、以牙还牙，就是指在辩论中以其人之道还治其人之身。这种方法适合用在对方讲歪理、不讲理等情况下。 正面进攻以事实说话，直截了当，一针见血，以痛快淋漓的情感，干净利落的语言说服对方。 当年，爱国将领冯玉祥治军有方，利用基督教维系军心，每天早操前必问士兵：“弟兄们，我们是谁的军队？”官兵们照例要按他的话回答：“我们是老百姓的军队！”有一天，冯玉祥刚刚照例问话完毕，队伍里就有一个士兵突然大声回答：“我们是洋人的军队！”冯玉祥勃然大怒，下令将这个士兵押到台上，责问他为什么这么回答。这个士兵面不改色，直言道：“听洋人的话，信洋人的教，替洋人打仗，受洋人的气，怎么不是洋人的军队？”这个士兵的两次回答都直截了当，没有一丝一毫的含糊，令冯玉祥无言以对，但冯玉祥从心底赏识这个“冒失鬼”憨直的性格与无畏的胆量，暗喜发现一个闯将的可造之才，不但没有责罚他，反而提拔重用了他。这个小兵，就是后来的著名将军吉鸿昌。 正面进攻是指运用真实判断直接确定对方论证的虚假，或以论据的真实性直接推出论题的真实性。正面进攻以事实说话，直截了当，一针见血，可以收到立竿见影的作用。 有一次，阿凡提在城里一家饭馆里吃了三个煮熟的鸡蛋，吃完后，发现身上没有带钱。于是，他就向开饭馆的财主表示了歉意，并保证下次经过时一定把钱送上。财主说：“阿凡提，三个鸡蛋算不了什么，以后再说吧！” 过了半年，阿凡提又一次经过这里，他见了开饭馆的财主就问：“上次我吃的三个鸡蛋，该给你多少钱呢？”财主用算盘拨拉了半天说：“不多，不多，你就给三百块钱吧。”阿凡提吃惊地说：“三个鸡蛋三百块钱，你这是发昏了吧！”财主说：“这算多吗？如果这三个鸡蛋没给你吃掉，早孵出三只母鸡来了。如果一只母鸡半年下一百个蛋，三只母鸡就会下三百个蛋。三百个蛋再孵成小鸡，你说，应该值多少钱？” 于是，阿凡提和财主争吵起来，财主讨不到三百块钱，便到皇帝那里告了阿凡提一状。 皇帝想重重地惩罚惩罚阿凡提，便亲自审理这个案子。然而，到了审案的这天，皇帝一直坐等到中午，左等右等也不见阿凡提到来，便连连派人去催，好不容易，才看见阿凡提手提一把铁勺姗姗而来。 皇帝大声说：“阿凡提！你好大胆，为什么迟迟不到？” 阿凡提平静地回答说：“陛下，我和邻居合伙种的二亩麦子明天就得下种了，我们正忙着炒麦种，所以就耽误了点时间。”皇帝听了大笑着说：“炒熟的麦子还能出苗？” 阿凡提立即反驳说：“陛下，既然炒熟的麦子不能出苗，那么，煮熟的鸡蛋还能孵出小鸡来吗？” 皇帝和财主听了，顿时张口结舌，半天说不出一句话来。 在这个故事里，阿凡提采用了针锋相对、以牙还牙的方法，让皇帝和财主张口结舌，没有办法继续辩论下去。 1860年6月，在牛津大学的讲坛上，自称为达尔文的“斗犬”的赫胥黎为了捍卫进化论，与大主教威尔伯福斯展开了针锋相对的舌战。 威尔伯福斯首先用一副流氓的腔调发难：“究竟是通过你的祖父，还是通过你的祖母，你才从猿猴变过来的呢？” 赫胥黎面对这种侮辱性的挑衅，从容镇定，奋起攻击：“人类没有理由因为他的祖先是猴子而感到羞耻，与真理背道而驰才是真正的羞耻。只有那些游手好闲，不学无术而又一心要靠祖先名位的人，才会为祖先野蛮而感到羞耻……” 威尔伯福斯大主教目瞪口呆，无言以辩。 在上例中，面对论敌挑衅，侮辱性的发难，赫胥黎居高临下，理直气壮，抓住要害，揭露实质，使之目瞪口呆，无言以辩。 正面进攻，焦点在于不拐弯抹角，不借用语言艺术，往往以痛快淋漓的情感、干净利落的语言解决矛盾，说服对方。 正面进攻法要求论辩双方在简短的几个回合中辩明某一问题的是非，因而除了要求论辩者善于切中论敌的要害外，还必须具有较高的口语表达技巧。论辩之辞，要力求清新、明快、简洁有力；可适当运用反复、反问等手法，以增强论辩的力度；还可适当地运用排比，层层递进，步步紧逼，使论辩具有一种磅礴的气势。 ★忠言逆耳，投其所好 严厉尖锐的批评，可以通过表扬、称赞的方式出现，做到“忠言”不“逆耳”、“良药”不“苦口”。陪衬术在说辩中的妙用，就能产生这种“忠言顺耳”的效果。 《晏子春秋》载：齐景公性贪玩好动，常常上树掏鸟，晏子想批评他改掉这个恶习。一天晏子听说景公掏了小鸟，又放回巢里。晏子问景公：“国君，你干什么累得满头大汗？” 景公说：“我去掏小鸟，可小鸟太弱了，我又把它放回巢里了。” 晏子称赞道：“了不起，您真是具有圣人的修养啊！” 景公不解：“这怎么是有圣人的修养呢？” 晏子说：“国君，您把弱小的雏鸟放回巢里，表明您深知长幼的大道理，有可贵的同情心。君王您对禽兽都这样仁爱，何况于百姓呢？” 景公闻言，十分高兴。以后再也不掏鸟玩耍，而对百姓的疾苦则格外地关心了。 顺其所好，攻其所蔽的陪衬术，在我们日常生活的交际说辩中同样是经常用得着的。心理学表明，情感引导行动。积极的情感，比如喜欢、愉悦、兴奋，往往产生理解、接纳、合作的行为效果；而消极的情感，如讨厌、憎恶、气愤等，则带来排斥、拒绝。正如管理心理学所说的：“如果你想要人们相信你是对的，并按照你的意见行事，那就首先需要人们喜欢你。否则，你的尝试就会失败。”这表明，要使别人对你的态度从排斥、拒绝、漠然处之到对你产生兴趣，付一份关注，接受你的批评或建议，就需要最大限度地引导、激发他的积极情感。而陪衬术的“顺其所好”，实际上就是一个引导和激发的过程。因此，陪衬术的运用，其关键是要“顺”得自然，“顺”得巧妙，“陪衬”得合理而激发对方产生积极情感。 怎样才能做到投其所好呢？ 一、激发对方的“兴奋点” 有一位业务员去见一位大公司的经理，这位大经理正埋头看文件，没有抬头的意思，把业务员晾在一旁。这位业务员为了打破这种僵局，于是说：“没想到，总经理的办公室如此简洁、素雅，我还从没见过哪位企业家的办公室像您的这样别致、脱俗呢？”总经理马上摘下眼镜，抬起了头。 于是，他们从企业家的生活态度谈到环境与工作的关系，谈到事业的成败。总经理述说了自己那段充满艰辛、感人至深的奋斗史。 任何一个人，对自己的成功史都会乐此不疲地津津乐道，那是最令其精神振奋的人生篇章。业务员很懂说辩艺术，谈话时适时提问，使总经理谈兴大开。谈话结束时，他们自然成了“知己”，一笔业务也如愿以偿。 说辩中的顺其所好，要善于激发对方的“兴奋点”。说辩中常常遇到这样的情况：当你需要对方听你的陈述、请求、汇报时，对方或许不断看表；或许嘴里应付着，眼睛却在注意别处；或转移话题，不愿多谈；……遇到这种情况，就应先放弃说辩话题，寻找对方的“兴奋点”，从对方的“兴奋点”谈起。 二、发现对方的“闪光点” 小李：“老王，你一向乐于助人，我有点小事，不知您肯帮忙不？” 小李挖掘老王这“你一向乐于助人”的“闪光点”，明确地表达了对老王的肯定和尊重，自然老王乐于接受。而且既是“一向乐于助人”，一点小事有求于你，也就是说，你力所能及，怎好推辞？自然小李能轻而易举地达到目的。 诚然，在发现对方的“闪光点”并进行“恭维”时，一般不要曲意逢迎，应掌握好恭维的尺度，恰如其分，不留痕迹。不能像某些“职业媒婆”那样，竭尽凑合之能事，刻意“恭维”，胖女人变成有性感；丑的变成有个性；任性成了良家千金的娇弱；如果家境贫寒就是“父母不慕虚荣，家风稳健、踏实”；智商低也没关系，如果是男的，就说他是大器晚成型，女的就说她很稳重；如果爱风流，女的就是现代化的活泼姑娘，而男的就是交际广泛、受人欢迎的好青年。 要善于发现对方的长处、优点等“闪光点”，并从理解的角度真诚地赞美对方。 “顺其所好”时不分对象、不分时机、不分场合、不分尺度，往往会事与愿违。这是在发现对方的“闪光点”并进行“顺其所好”的“恭维”时要注意的。 三、寻找对方的“兴趣点” 战国时，一心想称霸的齐宣王向孟轲请教一个问题：“怎样才能统一天下，像我这样的人能不能统一天下？”“能。”孟轲想到当时所有的国君都是爱听颂扬的话，他略沉思了一下，说：“我听说，有一次新钟铸就，准备杀大牛祭钟，您因为看见好好的一头牛无辜而被杀，感到不忍，结果没杀那头牛，是有这么回事吧？” 齐宣王别提多高兴了，他想不到孟老夫子也听说了这件善事，赶紧回答说：“是有这么回事。”孟子说：“大王，这就是恻隐之心啊！凭您这种恻隐之心，就可以行王道，统一天下。”齐宣王高兴起来，他眼前充满了希望和光明，急于听孟子下面的话。 孟子接着说：“问题是您肯干不肯干罢了。比如有人说，我力能举起千斤东西，但却举不起一根羽毛；眼睛能看得清毫毛，却看不见满车的木柴。您相信这话是真的吗？”齐宣王道：“我当然不相信这种话。” 孟子继续说：“这就对了。如今您能用好心对待牛，却不能用这种心爱护老百姓，这也同样叫人不能相信。这就和不肯举一根羽毛和看不见一车木柴一个样。如今老百姓所以不能安居乐业，这就是您根本不去关心的缘故，而不是能不能干的问题。所以我说，您能行王道，能统一天下，问题是您'不为也，非不能也！'” 孟子抓住齐宣王不忍杀牛的慈善之心，先顺其所好，奉承一通，由此肯定齐宣王有统一天下的条件。这奉承出自孟子事先的调查，使宣王自鸣得意，为接受批评创造了气氛。然后，孟子引申出严厉的批评。虽然批评尖锐深刻，毫不留情面，但由于有奉承作陪衬，故能使宣王欣然接受。这样，以“顺其所好”的奉承作陪衬，进而达到“攻其所蔽”的批评之目的。这便是陪衬术在说辩中的妙用。 每个人都有自己的兴趣爱好。而当别人谈到这一爱好时，便很容易入耳，并且谈起来津津有味。善言者就此而顺其所好，同时借题发挥，巧妙地引发出自己的话题，阐明自己的观点。 在说辩中，要阐明自己的主张，阐述自己的意思，让对方关注地倾听自己的论述，使其理解、接收，进而达到“攻其所蔽”的目的，无疑先要激发对方产生积极情感，而“顺其所好”，正是使对方产生积极情感的“桥梁”和“通道”。 ★蛇打七寸，进攻有力 在辩论中要善于抓住论敌的要害和弱点，打蛇要打七寸，抓住了对手的要害和弱点，就要一攻到底：分析其实质，揭示其虚假，批驳其错误，置论敌于死地。 目光敏锐，及时抓住对手失误；蛇打七寸，使其寸步难行。 与对手论辩，关键是要找到对手的弱点，然后抓住弱点，强烈猛攻，对手必定难以抵挡，俯首称臣。 在一次以“做好商业服务工作要靠顾客理解”为题的论辩赛上，反方的一名队员失于冷静，言辞不当，带有人身攻击的味道，主持人及时予以提醒。 正方的一名队员立刻抓住这个现象作为论据，用以阐述自己的观点： “我们以为，做好商业服务工作主要靠服务员的事业心、责任感，不能靠顾客是否理解来决定我们的服务态度，就像我们今天来参加这场论辩赛一样，不能因为对方态度不好，不理解，我们就不认认真真地把比赛进行下去。如果像对方所主张的那样，只有顾客理解才能把工作做好，我们的论辩赛不就进行不下去了吗？” 这位辩手目光敏锐，及时抓住对方言辞上的失误，蛇打七寸，使其寸步难行。 攻其弱点，首先要能敏锐地发现其弱点，无论是论题不真实、论据不充分、论证不周全，还是举例不妥当、表述不清楚等都要及时发现，及时分析，及时反驳，有道是：“哪壶不开提哪壶。” 一次，列宁与德国妇女领袖蔡特金谈起了关于劳动人民在自身未得到解放之前，存在文盲现象到底有没有好处的问题，两人产生了对立意见。 蔡特金说：“不要这样厉害地埋葬文盲现象吧，列宁同志。在某种程度上，它确实帮助了你们的革命。它保护了工农的心灵，使之不致为资产阶级的思想和概念所闭塞和毒化。你们的宣传和鼓动正落在处女地上，在你不必首先连根掘掉整片原始森林的地方，播种和收获是比较容易的。” 对此，列宁指出了它的错误：“是的，那是不错，但只是在某种限度以内。或者更正确地说，只是在我们斗争的某一阶段。文盲现象同夺取政权的斗争，同打碎旧国家机器的需要是可以相容的。但我们是否仅为了破坏而破坏呢？我们破坏，是为了建设更好的。文盲现象是同建设的任务不相容的，根本不相容的。” 这里，列宁紧紧抓住对方“文盲无害论”论题的错误，正确阐述了文盲在破坏与建设中所起的作用的不同，确定了对方论题的错误和虚假。 下面是“温饱是谈道德的必要条件”的辩论中的一段辩词：