Reddit Reddit reviews Thank You For Arguing, Revised and Updated Edition: What Aristotle, Lincoln, And Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion

We found 8 Reddit comments about Thank You For Arguing, Revised and Updated Edition: What Aristotle, Lincoln, And Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Books
Self-Help
Success Self-Help
Thank You For Arguing, Revised and Updated Edition: What Aristotle, Lincoln, And Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion
Expanded and revised.
Check price on Amazon

8 Reddit comments about Thank You For Arguing, Revised and Updated Edition: What Aristotle, Lincoln, And Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion:

u/Sarah-rah-rah · 5 pointsr/IAmA

Wow, you're absolutely terrible at debate.

What everyone is trying to explain to you that just because OP went around a few dangerous places and lived, that doesn't make these places safe. Hence, OP saying "you were all wrong!" is disingenuous because it's based on luck instead of actual crime stats.

A few resources for learning how to debate topics online: this book, this book, all of these.

u/PM-Me-Beer · 5 pointsr/legaladvice

I don't have any great books along the lines of "A Day in the Life of a Lawyer", but I do have some suggestions if that's the career path that she's interested in.

Law 101: A great primer on current law/interpretation that tries to keep it approachable. It's a solid catch-all without getting deep into any one thing.

Getting to Yes and Thank You for Arguing: Two great books on negotiation, which is really one of the key fundamentals to any legal career.

u/gh3ttoduCanada · 3 pointsr/army

Thank You For Arguing by Jay Heinrichs

Basically anything by Robert D Kaplan

-

*Will edit when I get off work

*turns out I didn't really bring any other books that'd be generally interesting to other people, ha!

u/gaums · 2 pointsr/occult

Get these books:

Logic Deductive and Inductive

McGraw-Hill Handbook of English Grammar and Usage, 2nd Edition

Thank You For Arguing, Revised and Updated Edition.


Start studying each one of them.
When you start studying, you will be practicing trivium.

u/Falunel · 2 pointsr/Tulpas

>I definitely need to work on my manipulation skills, so I should look for books on that.

You're welcome.

u/test0 · 1 pointr/interestingasfuck

If you like this you may like Thank You for Arguing by Jay Heinrichs

u/Arcosah · 1 pointr/changemyview

Nitpicking the definition of a paragraph? It's literally a paragraph followed by a sentence. It heavily suggests to me that the comment was never read. The length of a paragraph isn't concrete but it's definitely more than one sentence. That doesn't matter anymore at this point, but christ, are we going to argue about any little thing?

At this point I've certainly put more time and effort in to explaining my "Uhh" than he put in to his low effort, unreasoned, unexplained "racism doesn't affect the blacks" argument. I've written way more than he has. If we are under the assumption that only 1 of however many comments I've made here counts for anything and you're picking the one that say "Uhh", then sure. But this whole fucking time I've been trying to elaborate on my "Uhh" and you're just stuck on the fact that the original comment wasn't productive. Haven't I more than addressed that by this point? Haven't I made plenty of productive conversation at this point? Can we move the fuck on from that now? Great, thanks.

Stop putting words in my mouth, you're terrible about that. You've done it quite a few times:

> You only think that because you assume your opinions are facts

> You are simply dismissing it because you disagree with the opinion.

> So because the other person holds unfounded opinions, you've judged that they are either incapable or unwilling to change their mind, and therefore you won't bother trying?

> You're just making a premature judgment and giving up before you even try to effect change.

>
You're not arguing against me, you're arguing against this strawman you've built up and used slippery sloped your way in to a very contorted view of what I have written.

We will simply have to agree to disagree if you think the burden of proof does not lie with the one who is proclaiming something.

> My fourth point seems to be exactly what you meant, by your explanation. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems your point is that certain people are brainwashed beyond help and so we shouldn't bother trying to reason with them or change their views. If that is how you feel I'm just going to have to agree to disagree. I think that is a judgmental and unproductive mindset that will lead to absolutely no progress in anything.

My point is exactly what I fucking wrote in the god damn comment. See here:

> The point of that idea is to show that I would normally be willing to educate someone who has an unfounded opinion but is just ignorant, but arguing with someone who has brainwashed themselves (usually confirmation bias) is a fruitless task.

It's bolded this time in case you have trouble seeing it, and it's a perfect example of the many times you've tried contorting my opinion in to something else. If you don't see any time you've tried to paraphrase what I said, made assumptions on what I believe based on your paraphrasing, and then argued against those assumptions, then I highly suggest this.

I'm not continuously trying to change the subject or argue that my original comment was somehow okay, I'm trying to elaborate on the fucking comment, ask how to deal with situations where the other party appears brainwashed, and be more productive in day to day things just like this. If you didn't want me to reply and elaborate, or ask a question, or converse in general then why did you even make a comment?

If you disagree, explain your view. Repeatedly referring to my original comment isn't productive discussion, you're just being condescending.