If You're Not Right at the End, You Lost

When people argue, they normally go into the argument to prove that they are right and the other person is wrong. There are times in which people, often immature people, get so caught up in the fight that they have to win at all costs. Teenagers have even admitted that they refused to give in when they knew their parents were right because they refused to let their parents win. Perhaps that is why Proverbs tells us that answering a fool according to his folly will make us a fool as well. Imagine arguing with someone who will not surrender no matter how right you are and no matter the cost to them. The Bible is right.

(Of course, as parents, the next verse tells us that we have to answer a fool according to his folly or he will be right in his own eyes. It’s one of the unfortunate paradoxes of parenting. See Proverbs 26:4-5. Martin Luther purportly thought this was a contradiction and questioned whether Proverbs should be kept. Perhaps a parent corrected him.)

Our goal in any argument to be right when we finish. If we win an argument, but we were wrong, then we haven’t really won. If we managed to convince someone else that we were right, we have compounded the problem because there are now two people who are wrong rather than one. The purpose of engaging in any conflict should never be to prove our side, but to discover Truth and to have both people as correct as possible when the discussion is over.

Most often when people argue, one or both is right, and one or both are wrong. More often than we might think, both sides are right and wrong on something, and if we listen carefully, we might be able to figure out where we are wrong and fix it. If, at the end of an argument, we are right, then we won. We might have to concede that the other person was right and we were wrong, but in that concession, we become right, and if we’re right, then we win.

Remember: If we're wrong at the end of the discussion - WE LOST! If we're right at the end of the discussion - WE WON! If Reality is the highest value, if God's Truth is to prevail, then victory is defined by whether we finish with the right answer or the wrong answer. So the only way to be a winner in a disagreement is to be RIGHT when we're finished with the discussion.

Understand, Define, Be Understood

People can argue without getting emotional or raising their voices. All this requires is listening carefully, explaining clearly, and sticking to the issue. We should not raise our voice when we ought to reinforce our point. Shouting is a sign that someone isn’t communicating, someone isn’t listening, or that you have run out of valid points. Calling names and other personal attacks also shows an inability to make a valid, logical point.

If you consider raising your voice in anger and making personal attacks as losses for yourself, as evidence that you are wrong, then it goes far to help you keep your cool. If you and your spouse both agree that personal attacks amounts to a concession of the point, you will both be less likely to go there. At the first personal attack your spouse should have the right to look at you and say “Your personal attack just told me that you admit you’re wrong. If that’s not the case, shall we get back to the point?”

Sticking to the issue is important, and keeping discussions as factual as possible is also important. Issues are hard to address when unrelated things are brought in. Problems are difficult to resolve if the facts aren’t known. If attacks become personal, resolution is difficult, often impossible. If conclusions are discussed rather than facts, many possible solutions will be overlooked. Exploring the truth of any matter is critical, and that requires focused effort to resolve the true issues and understand the facts.

A common complaint in any dispute is that the other side doesn’t understand. However, in any dispute or problem, there is a tendency to want to make the other side understand, but not much of a desire to understand the other side. When both sides are pushing to make the other side understand, they are not listening. When they do listen, they often do so not for the purpose of understanding, but for the purpose of disputing the statements. When you only listen so you can turn things around, you aren’t really listening at all.

This is what children often do when they ask their parent for an explanation about a decision. If they are asking because they want to understand, parents will normally make an effort to explain. If they are asking only because they want to argue, parents are perfectly within their rights to refuse to get into it.

Understand...

In any conflict, we should seek to understand the other side first. As we explore the other side and the reasons for their position, we often find that they have some very good points. Their points might not take into account the facts we know and the perspectives we hold, but careful listening can be very illumuniating. Even before we start making our point, we might already find areas in which we discover the other side is correct. Perhaps they know something we don’t know, or perhaps they applied a logic we overlooked. By trying to understand, we can honestly evaluate whether we still believe we are right.

By trying to understand first, we lay the foundation for making our own point and the other side is normally much more receptive to listening when we have listened first. By reflecting back our understanding of their position and having them confirm that we understood what they said, we are then in a better position to help them understand our position, provided their point hasn’t already changed our position.

Define...

Once we understand, we need to define what we mean by certain things. As we try to understand the other side, we sometimes discover a use of words that differs from what we might mean with the same words. We might also discover that the intent is the same, but the rules are different. Each side might be trying to express respect according to the rules by which they define respect. In such a case, the entire dispute might have arisen over the definition and rules for respect, or love, or effort, or honor.

The argument might have arisen because of a difference in the definition of bragging. Some people think it isn’t bragging if you can really do it. Others think that exaggeration and lies aren’t the only bragging, but talking even about true accomplishments and abilities is bragging if the audience doesn’t want to hear it, it isn’t appropriate, or you’re stealing someone’s spotlight. Some think it’s bragging if you even answer a question truthfully and it makes you look good. Imagine the first person defending himself from the last person when he’s accused of bragging. The whole dispute might have been solved simply be defining what you mean by the word.

Generalizations always require clarification. We tend to attack the generalization without asking the other person what they mean by it. For instance, if a woman tells her husband "We NEVER do anything I want!" chances are good that she doesn't actually mean what she's saying. He might have a tendency to defend with "That's absurd! Just last month we did..." But she's not making a factual statement, she's making an emotional statement. By pausing and asking "Could you clarify that for me? It sounds like you're saying that we have never once ever done anything you wanted to do. I want to make sure I understand what you mean by that."

It's better not to generalize, but that's something we practice for ourselves, not something we can effectively enforce without the other person's consent. When the other person does it, we want to understand what that person means. We don't want to turn a disagreement about an issue into a fight over generalizations.

Also, it's important to try to understand the real question. For instance, suppose my wife is 9 month pregnant and she's had a really bad day and feels like a fat, stupid cow and I come home and find her sitting on the kitchen floor in the middle of a spill and she's crying. Then she looks up at me through teary eyes and asks me if I think she's looks like a fat cow - that is not the time to tell her "Actually, yes..." The real question she's asking is "EVEN THOUGH I know I look like a fat cow, do you love me?" She wants to know how I see her through my eyes of love, not how she objectively looks. I can assume that she's asking "Do you love me?" with any number of questions she might ask by understand the underlying definition of her question. The moment of the question is not the time to discuss this, but some other time.

...Be Understood

If we truly understand the other side, and we’ve defined what we mean by what we say, then we are in the best position to make our side understood. We can even reference the opposing view, using their facts or their logic to help us make our point, something we cannot do if we do not understand the other side of the argument. As we understand, define, and seek to be understood, then both sides can work through a solution mutually, one that fulfills the needs and intents of both sides. That is a resolution.

A key advantage to seeking to understand first is that the other side very often has good point, facts of which we are unaware, or logic that accounts for something we have not considered. We might discover that they are right without putting our foot in our mouth first. In these cases, we simply acknowledge their point and move on. Even more often, something in their point reveals a need to modify our position, and in these cases, we can make the change before we argue our position. Then we begin by acknowledging their best points and let them know that they thought of some things we hadn’t considered, and while we’ve changed our position a little, we think that the following things are relevant... and then we make our case.

We must also be careful about ascribing meanings to facts that do not necessarily follow from the facts. We might think that an event or a behavior has a particular meaning, but it might not mean that at all. If we stick to the facts, we can address the facts and develop a solution to the issue at hand. Finishing right, finishing with a solution, even if it wasn’t the solution we originally desired, is the goal of any argument. Disagreements aren’t our opportunity to pound other people’s positions into submission, but an opportunity for exploration, for gaining new insights, and for gaining wisdom by finishing right.

Even individuals have internal disputes. The purpose of the internal argument, hopefully, is to debate the relevant points so we can arrive as the proper conclusion. In “Fiddler on the Roof,” Tevye has "one hand/other hand" dialogs as the action around him freezes to illustrate how we do this in ourselves. He starts off with statements on one hand, then the other hand, and he thinks it through to a final decision. We all do this when we are faced with a choice.

A married couple is a unit. If there is any dispute, any disagreement, the husband and wife are “one hand” and “the other hand” and the purpose of communicating in the disagreement is to find the right answer. The couple should seek to be right when the couple is done dealing with the disagreement. If both the husband and the wife treat any conflict as they would if it were an internal dialog and sought to come out of it with the right answer as a couple, the whole dynamic of a difference of opinion changes.

Remember: the husband and the wife are no longer two, but one. They are one flesh, one unit, one household, one family. They are on the same team! Jesus said that a house divided cannot stand, so that means that we should not divide over any difference. When we do, we damage our ability to stand. If we argue wrongly, if we tear at each other personally, then we tear down our house. Be it actual people who would like to see you fail, or challenges like a financial problem or a family problem or a health challenge, the enemy won't even have come after you if you defeat yourself.

The marriage is to be protected, and that means that you must not cause harm in a fight. You must engage in loving, intelligent discourse to the extent possible. Each spouse needs to do his or her very best to make certain, as far as depends on him or her, that more anger is not poured into a situation.