Another insidious technique involves embedding presuppositions within questions. For example, Newman asks, “Why should women put up with those reasons?” This implies that Peterson believes women should endure certain situations, regardless of his actual stance. The trap here is that many people fall into the habit of answering the question directly, inadvertently arguing for a position they do not hold. Instead, it’s essential to identify the hidden presupposition and call it out. Peterson skillfully navigates this by responding, “I’m not saying they should put up with it. I’m saying that the claim—” effectively redirecting the conversation and clarifying his viewpoint.
The Smash Technique
The “smash technique” is another form of conversational bullying where disparate terms are combined to confuse the argument. A striking example occurs when Newman states, “Quit the abuse. Quit the anger.” By merging two very different concepts—abuse and anger—she creates a compound question that puts pressure on Peterson to respond quickly. This tactic can catch anyone off guard, making it easy to overlook the nuance of each term. The best way to handle this is to slow down the conversation and tackle one point at a time. Peterson exemplifies this approach when he suggests, “Let’s just go to the first question; those both are complicated questions.” By doing this, he maintains control of the dialogue and addresses each concern thoughtfully.
Persuasion Strategies in Tough Situations
Though Peterson wasn’t necessarily trying to change Newman’s mind, his approach offers several valuable lessons for engaging in tough conversations:
Continue reading on the next page
Sharing is caring!
