I spent my last sixteen years before retiring in sales where being persuasive is a necessity. The best lesson I ever learned was to shut up and listen .... and I mean really listen. Many times in a sales (or debate) situation, one can concentrate so much on what he are going to say that he fails to really hear what is being said. When teaching sales techniques, I used to demonstrate this with the following story: Feel free to take notes. You get on your bus at exactly 5:19 pm and drive 2.7 miles due north. You make a left turn and go exactly 2 miles, stop and pick up a red-headed boy with glasses. You turn left again and go 1.7 miles where you pick up a girl with a red hat holding a lunch pail on her left hand. Total combined weight of the boy and girl is 162 pounds. You then drive 4.2 miles and drop them off at school. 2.73 gallons of gas was used. Using the information I have given you, how old is the bus driver .... hands only? Try this on a group sometime. You will be surprised how many will not be able to answer the question.
Dono

Well, what I did was add 2.7 + 2 + 1.7 + 4.2, then divided it by 2.73 and used an elaborate algabraic formula to factor in the 162 lbs.

The answer I got was 51. That's how old I am, the bus driver.

__________________
- Which is worse--ignorance or apathy? For my part, I don't know and I don't care. -

You don't need to know anything about the topic to be persuasive in a debate. It helps, but it's not essential.

Figure out exactly what you're trying to get the other person to accept as true, figure out how you need to go from their starting point to reach that conclusion, fill in the gaps with logical arguments and then back up the arguments with facts or (preferably) case studies.

But the ultimate trick is knowing what you're trying to prove and what the other person is trying to prove and identifying what arguments you need to make to ensure that you have a better case.

Also, one of the best ways to change someones mind is to start by accepting all their premises and still proving that your conclusion stands, so, for example, in an abortion debate when you're proposing (for) abortion: EVEN IF you accept that life begins at conception, still being able to argue that women should be able to choose abortion. It's really effective.
*unfortunately, often the only way to do it is to deliberately twist what the other side has said to suit your case, which isn't a particularly good tactic*

__________________
"Everything interesting happens on the edge of chaos..."

#1 thing to remember:

Some people won't change their minds. You can drop mountains and mountains of evidence on them, refute every point, point out every lie and fallacy, give massive historical data, everything one can do rationally, and some people will not change.

Once you figure out who they are, drop them in the ignore list.

__________________
Some people love their country because of what it is, because of the principles it is built on, because of its prosperity and freedom. Then others love their country because it is their country, and will destroy all that is actually good about it to silence those who disagree. Which do you think you are? - Symbiote

Here, here! There are way too few rational people in the world and far too many who base their views and values on how they feel on the spur of the moment or what perspective with benefit them most instead of coherent, logical reasoning!

__________________
"Everything interesting happens on the edge of chaos..."

i'm starting to get the impression that the ideas of honest discussion and arguments based on facts is a dying form of debate.

__________________
Some people love their country because of what it is, because of the principles it is built on, because of its prosperity and freedom. Then others love their country because it is their country, and will destroy all that is actually good about it to silence those who disagree. Which do you think you are? - Symbiote

No, what is true is still important but it can be extremely exhilirating to be able to create a strong enough argument to convince people of something that isn't true!

__________________
"Everything interesting happens on the edge of chaos..."

earlier I advocated the Socratic method..... Ask questions to make a point.... I do not mean use leading questions; however, I suggest that people will be more likely to concede a point when they have accepted that point "on their own."

IMO, people don't listen when told they are wrong, but a gentle exposure of their thought process, via specific questions, will often allow others to grasp your point/concept.

Obviously, this tactic does not always work (understatement), however, it does usually keep the discourse civil.

Pete

__________________
[COLOR=Blue]"wit is educated insolence" - Atistotle[/COLOR]

Any methodology that introduces and encourages civility into a discussion expands the learning process for those who tend to resort to emotion when lacking facts or understanding on all facets of an issue. Pure emotion on a level of I'm right you're wrong because I say so invariably leads to personal attacks using verbal slurs. And, of course, there are always those persons who were seemingly reared without manners or grace who seem to feel verbal slurs are their only method of making their point(s), but most forum administration thoughtfully provides an ignore feature to deal with that.

__________________
These are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. ~Groucho Marx~

It's just like Simon and Garfunkel said:

"All lies and jest still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

The problem is when you deal with someone who doesn't want to be civil. This happens a lot in the evolution v creation arguments because both sides have very core beliefs at stake, divinity and the foundation of modern biology.

Circular arguments should be reserved for those who avidly seek conversion or frustration. Experts, and amateurs, on both sides of mythology and science debates are like attempting to mix oil and water; one could shake the combination forever without success. Agreeing to disagree would save a lot of bandwidth, but most people with Internet access are blessed with spare time.

A majority of most forum topics are based on sound reasoning versus loyalty, where sociodemographic loyalty disguised as intellectual knowledge akin to mythology often removes civility from debate like a Steven King character going into the wrong neighborhood bar in a strange town out of costume.

__________________
These are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. ~Groucho Marx~

i agree with this fully. leading questions, rather than assertions or accusations, almost always work better to continuing the discussion rather than putting the other party in retaliation mode

A: "your statement makes absolutely no sense"
B: "can you explain the logic in your staement? i must have missed it"

A is assertive and might either shut down the discussion or provoke retaliation. B is more diplomatic and invites a reply for further discussion, while causing the other party to see for himself that the statement doesnt make sense. they both convey the same idea, but B is more persuasive

__________________
when man tried to understand nature, theism was born
when man tried to understand God, atheism was born

Not to stir a pot, but........Saying something that is seemingly benign such as "your statement makes no sense" can have a strategic advantage. One can then use less inflamatory language as you suggest after the other is on the defensive. This has the advantage of subtly making that person looking like they are raving and it disengages their logic. If one is actually trying to win a debate (tournament lets say) it can side track the individual from making logical arguments. They spend too much time reacting.

A better thing for being persuasive would be to keep your cool, argue logically, and let your emotions go elsewhere instead of the argument. You appear much more persuasive in doing this and the other person will continue to try and "get your goat" with little success and look foolish in the process.

__________________
epaphras_faith

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose. (Jim Elliot)

how do we deal with fanatics?

__________________
Some people love their country because of what it is, because of the principles it is built on, because of its prosperity and freedom. Then others love their country because it is their country, and will destroy all that is actually good about it to silence those who disagree. Which do you think you are? - Symbiote