Everything One Needs to Know about Winning an Argument Jay Heinrichs is the author of Thank You for Arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln, and Homer Simpson can Teach us About The Art of Persuasion. He has written several books throughout his writing career. In particular, Thank You for Arguing is a New York Times Bestseller. Heinrichs uses certain tools to help the audience win arguments successfully and forces different techniques on how to win them. In some chapters, he gives real life advice/stories about arguments, and throughout the entire book, he uses ethos, logos, and pathos techniques to really engage the audience. This book would be a smart investment if one wanted to learn how to win an argument successfully. This book informs and
…show more content…
However, eventually his wife won the dispute efficiently using guilt as her main weapon. He also talks about how to be rhetorical and gives many examples of rhetorical arguments. One in particular is when “if you [the audience] ask a rhetorical question and then answer it” it is called a “self-answering question.” (205) Asking a self-answering question uses rhetoric and smarts because it lets the audience think they have a say in the matter but in reality they don’t; it’s a mind game. Also, throughout the book, he uses manipulation in almost all of his arguments and most of them are guaranteed to be successful. Some would say chapter two is the most informative chapter. It talks about how to set goals during an argument. In chapter two, Heinrichs helped “distinguish between an argument and a fight” (15) and he helps you “choose what you want to get out of an argument.” (15) This is interesting because he explains how fights and arguments are two totally different things, “You fight to win; you argue to achieve agreement.” (17) This is meaningful to the audience because it is frustrating when one is trying to get a point across while someone is just flat out angry and just wants to hear themselves talk. However, on the other hand, it is much easier when two people are just voicing their opinions until they eventually come to a mutual conclusion or
However, eventually his wife won the dispute efficiently using guilt as her main weapon. He also talks about how to be rhetorical and gives many examples of rhetorical arguments. One in particular is when “if you [the audience] ask a rhetorical question and then answer it” it is called a “self-answering question.” (205) Asking a self-answering question uses rhetoric and smarts because it lets the audience think they have a say in the matter but in reality they don’t; it’s a mind game. Also, throughout the book, he uses manipulation in almost all of his arguments and most of them are guaranteed to be successful. Some would say chapter two is the most informative chapter. It talks about how to set goals during an argument. In chapter two, Heinrichs helped “distinguish between an argument and a fight” (15) and he helps you “choose what you want to get out of an argument.” (15) This is interesting because he explains how fights and arguments are two totally different things, “You fight to win; you argue to achieve agreement.” (17) This is meaningful to the audience because it is frustrating when one is trying to get a point across while someone is just flat out angry and just wants to hear themselves talk. However, on the other hand, it is much easier when two people are just voicing their opinions until they eventually come to a mutual conclusion or