I have been noticing over the last few years (15 to be exact) that there is more then one form of arguing. Assuming we are talking about peer to peer and there is no authority involved I have come up with three styles. I will use two fictional characters (Bill and Fred) to demonstrate all three.
1. The DV style (Devil's version)
This style is very common, basically this is intentionally twisting the meaning of other's words. Also used is the years ago trick. People change, especially in their childhood. When you are three and say something, you don't expect to have to stand by it ten years later. For example:
Bill: Hey there Fred
Fred: 'sup?
Bill: I met a caveman the other day, he was weird...
Fred: are you implying that all cavemen are weird?
Bill: um... no.
Fred: yes, you are! You may not have said it but it's clearly what you meant!
Bill: no its not!
Fred: yes it is! My grandfather is a caveman, you just called him weird!
Bill: No I didn't!
Fred: yes you did, you just said that. And beside 6 years ago you said the same thing and you said "I think your grandpa is weird cuz he is a caveman"
Bill: I did not!
Clearly Bill didn't mean to insult Fred's grandfather, he was just stating a fact.
2. The HV style (the honest version)
This is how people should really argue. It involves listening to what the other person had to say and trying to figure out the true meaning. If the person is younger then don't quote him from years ago. Really only a few months should be between when he says something and you quote it back to him. Especially if it's something trivial. For example four years ago I did not like basketball at all. Now I love it. Here is the example of the HV argument.
Bill: hey ya Fred!
Fred: 'sup Bill?
Bill: I was just wondering who you think is going to win the Super Bowl ?
Fred: well the steelers defense is pretty good, but I just don't think they have the offensive power to beat the packers.
Bill: What, seriously? The steelers have the hottest offense in the league!
Fred: No, look (whips out an iPhone) the game happened yesterday, and the steelers only had 35 total yards!
Bill: who'd of known!
3. Third and finally we have the IV style. This stands for Idiots Version. Now keep in mind, you don't have to be and idiot to use this, I just named it that for reference. This is when you believe you are right yet use faulty reasoning and untrue statements that you think are true. This is the style that most often uses references from years ago that no one really remembers right anymore, and maybe isn't true anyway. Twisted meaning is common too, just accidentally you truly believe that they said something else then they actually were trying to say. Example:
Bill: Hey fred!
Fred: 'sup bill?
Bill: Do you use the longest road in the catan version cities and knights?
Fred: no, of course not!
Bill: I think you do!
Fred: no, remember last time when we played we didn't use it!
Bill: dude that was like six years ago! You can't remember that!
Fred: oh yes I can! And anyway it says so in the rules.
Bill: why don't you go check then?
Fred: no reason to... I have the rules memorized.
Bill: ok, I'll go check then... ... See here! It says you do use it!
Fred: that rule book must be wrong!
Bill: I'm leaving, good bye Fred!
Fred: good riddance. :)
All the examples in this post are factitious. Any reference to any person living or dead is purely consequential.
Comment on any errors that you find.
Signing out,
Ryan Lokkesmoe
P.S. the packers will win the super bowl
