How to convince others of the correctness

Famous actress Barbara Brylska, who played the main role in the film "Irony of Fate", said: "I never scandals. Scandal - this is where you're wrong. And I'm always right. " Indeed, it is not necessary to shout and swear hard, trying to convince his interlocutor that he was right, even if you feel strongly that he is certainly mistaken. And what to do in this case? Let us turn to psychology and learn how experts advise to convince others of the correctness of his point of view without resorting to scandal.

Is the goal worth of funds?

The first step is think about it, and whether so you need to spend time, effort and maybe nerves, to convince the interlocutor in his own right. An occasion might not be too significant. But even if the matter of principle, be sure to make allowances for the person with whom you are talking. Maybe it's an inveterate stubborn that from harm will pull from your veins and balk to the last. Or is it a self-satisfied boss, which of course you can convince, but he then held his offense on you.

In severe cases, it is better not to engage in open confrontation, and wait it out. The fact that the other person was wrong, it will be possible to tactfully remind later, when the very subject of the dispute or the conversation is already irrelevant. In such a situation, "hindsight", even the most debaters will be ready to listen to your point of view.

Poker face

The most important thing - to exercise maximum tact and calmness. Then you will be taken seriously, even if you speak softly. Lay out their arguments confident and calm tone, take your time and do not get excited. Do not interrupt the interlocutor, and always listening to him until the end, even if convinced that it is fundamentally wrong. You will have time to refute his words. If you raise your voice, you start to show emotions, waving his arms and nervous, then get the other will not work in its position, even if you're right a hundred. That's how human psychology works.

someone else's eyes look

Try to show empathy and imagine yourself in the place of the interlocutor. What he was thinking? Why is he so sure he is right, for what arguments would apply, that he was concerned in the whole situation? If we can understand what he's thinking and how to look at the situation, it becomes quite clear what kind of things he needed to say, and what better not to touch.

Only in war as in war

It is not necessary to transfer in the personal space argument or conversation that you conduct. If the other party does not want to listen to you or not accepted your position, do not store it automatically in the "black list" of enemies or enemies. It's just a conversation in which the source itself is a neutral entity.

you do not like his opinion, and not the man himself. This will help not only to avoid resentment and mutual misunderstandings, but also give the opportunity to better understand the other person.

Be sure that he, too, there is no purpose to conduct a real war and hurt someone.

There is only one topic

Another "no", which should be avoided as it "does not expand the scope of the dispute or the conversation." In other words, it is not necessary to drag the conversation any other situations that have occurred up to the present discussion. For example, if the other person had once been wrong in a similar situation or showed lack of awareness, it is not necessary for him to remember it. Contrary to logic, it only hurt him and make him stronger to defend their opinions, and does not allow you to easily change his mind.

The protection is better attack

Be active. Try to think several steps ahead and anticipating the next steps and the arguments of the interlocutor, if it is to argue with you. This will be easier if you have already put yourself in his place. In this case, the activity does not involve fussiness: you only need to show confidence in his or her opinion and the willingness to defend it. Do not be afraid at the same time acquire a reputation as an aggressive personality or sklochnitsy - if exercised enough tact, something like "attack" you will create a reputation for persistent person, but no more.

flexible willow branch

To speak directly to the other party that he was wrong - a bad start reasoned argument. Any categorical statement in this area is better to soften. In the first place, so you do not offend the other person. Secondly, you can also turn out to be wrong. Third, the truth is often born of arguments, but they need to do to lead a peaceful, rather than turning into a battle. Therefore, immediately mark the position that both of you are in a conversation reasonable and polite people, and personally, you are ready for what may turn out to be wrong. In such a case, and the source is likely to assume the role of a "reasonable and polite" and will be ready to listen to the arguments.

I agree, but only part of

The psychology of persuasion is a small trick that will help you quickly and easily to convince his interlocutor that he was right. It is called "partial agreement". Select any part of the opponent's assertions with which you can agree. If it is a reasoned argument, that such a statement you will surely find.

Claim that you are with this statement totally agree, but it leads you to a few different conclusions. So it will be much easier to reach out to the interlocutor.

The retreat does not mean the defeat of

It may happen that the interlocutor to convince and does not succeed, although you will still be confident in their positions. Sometimes in such situations it is better to retreat and wait. Declare neutrality and let them know that you both may be right, but you will need to gather more facts. Return to this conversation when the source is in a good mood. At the same time really double-check all facts, if it can be done. When passions subside, and the ardor of dispute remains behind, the second time to persuade some opponents is much easier.