Name: 議論の術｜ジョーダン・ピーターソン (The art of argument | Jordan Peterson)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T08:06:20.000Z
Duration: 9 min 31 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

So how do you deal with situations where your words are likely to be used out of context,

Well, you see, you encounter a situation like that very frequently.

If you're having a discussion with someone you live with, for example, so someone you

have to be with for a long time – a lover, boyfriend, girlfriend, wife, husband—sibling

You're going to have contentious discussions about how to move forward and it's very

frequently the case that your words will be – that you'll be straw-manned.

The other person (and you too!) will try to win instead of trying to solve the problem.

What you have to kind of decide is – well two things.

The first thing is: you're probably wrong in some important way.

Being wrong in some important way is like having a map that doesn't correspond to

If you're wrong in some important way, when you go to where you're going you will get

lost and you might end up in a neighborhood that you don't want to visit!

And so now if you're talking to someone who is acting in opposition to you, it's

possible that during your contentious discussion they will tell you something—about how you're

Now you're not going to be very happy about that, because like who wants to discover that

But it's better to figure out that your map is inaccurate than it is to get lost.

And so one of the things you have to remember when you're discussing things with people,

even if they're out to defeat you, let's say, is that there is some glimmering of the

possibility that you could walk away with more knowledge than you walked in with.

And that's worth – that can be worth paying quite a price for.

And so I've had the opportunity to engage in public debate of an exceptionally contentious

nature for let's say 18 months nonstop, fundamentally.

But the upshot of that is that my arguments are in much better shape than they were, and—I

My THOUGHTS are much more refined than they were at the beginning of this process.

It's not my arguments are in better shape.

That's not the right way to think about it.

And that's all forged in the heat of conflict.

If you're discussing a contentious issue with someone you love and that you have to

live with and put up with, you want to listen to them.

Because what you really want to do is establish a lasting peace, and you might even have to

Maybe you're more verbally fluent than your partner (which doesn't mean, by the way,

that you're more right, it just means you can construct better arguments on the fly.

It doesn't necessarily mean that you're more accurate).

You might have to help your partner formulate their arguments so that you can really get

to grips with what it is that they're trying to say.

So that you can alter the way that you're constructing your own narrative and your joint

narrative, so that you're not butting heads unnecessarily as you move forward through

It's not a very good idea to win an argument with your wife.

That isn't what you want, because then you have a defeated partner.

And a defeated partner is often out to reclaim the defeat.

And so as a strategy for moving forward with someone who you're going to wake up beside

5,000 times it's not a very advisable strategy.

It's better to listen, to flesh out the argument on both sides, and to see if you

can come to a mutually acceptable negotiated settlement.

And that's the case in most encounters in life if you can manage that.

One of the things I do in my psychology seminar is I assign papers to students and then I

extract out propositions from the papers.

And they're propositions that are debatable.

And so then I outline the Pro side and I outline the Con side.

Like “if you agreed with this, this is what you'd think”.

If you disagreed with this, this is what you'd think.

Then I divide the students into groups, like four people per group.

You've got 20 minutes to make a pro argument.

You've got 20 minutes to make a con argument.

We'll go around the table and we'll see how, you know, we'll have each group rate

the other and we'll see who comes out on top.”

Well, what you want to do as an educator is you don't want to put forward a specific

Not when what you're trying to do is to discuss a contentious issue!

What you want to do is teach people how to take an argument apart and formulate a response.

And to do that it's actually extraordinarily useful to arbitrarily assign positions to

It's like, I don't care what you think, you're “pro” on this topic, generate

And what that does is it vastly widens people's conceptualizations of the argumentative space.

Because most really contentious issues – gun control, abortion, those sorts of things—there

They wouldn't be contentious issues otherwise.They're issues that don't go away.

They don't lend themselves to easy unitary solutions.

One of the things you want to learn if you're educated is that on any complex subject there's

And that you're going to come at that with your particular ideological bias, let's

Maybe even you might even come at it with things you've actually thought about, although

But you need to learn just exactly how localized your viewpoint is.

There's psychology experiments that demonstrate this quite clearly.

字幕リスト動画再生

議論の術｜ジョーダン・ピーターソン (The art of argument | Jordan Peterson)

entire

articulate

approach

context