Why Good Arguments Don't Always Win

A valid or strong argument, if by "good" argument you mean one that is both valid and compelling, encounters resistance for two primary reasons. Firstly, the argument may not be understood by the opposing party. Secondly, the argument might be seen as irrelevant by someone who is entirely committed to a belief or perspective. We will delve into these reasons and explore how other factors, such as emotional appeal and the delivery of the message, also play a significant role.

Reasons for Arguing Against Good Arguments

Two primary reasons explain why good arguments do not always win:

Lack of Understanding: Sometimes, an argument fails to sway someone simply because they do not comprehend the reasoning behind it. This is analogous to trying to win an argument with a child; as children are often not yet capable of rational thinking. They cannot understand the nuances of the argument, thus rendering it ineffective. Commitment to Belief: Others may be so deeply committed to their beliefs or perspectives that any argument seems irrelevant. This is particularly true for religious or spiritual beliefs, where faith often trumps reason. Trying to argue with such individuals is futile, as their beliefs are not grounded in logical reasoning but rather in faith. Consequently, these arguments waste both parties' time.

It is important to note that when both of these reasons come into play, the argument is even less likely to succeed.

Views on the Effectiveness of Good Arguments

There are differing views on whether good arguments always win. Some argue that good arguments can indeed win if they are presented in the right way and if the audience is receptive. However, others believe that the outcome often depends on the audience and their willingness to accept the argument.

From one perspective, good arguments may lose due to the bad intentions of the person presenting them, while from another perspective, good arguments may win due to the good intentions and the peaceful manner in which they are presented. Both outcomes remain possible, depending on the context and the audience's willingness to accept the argument.

Emotional Appeal and Likability

The effectiveness of a good argument is not solely determined by its content. How the argument is delivered, as well as the likability of the presenter, plays a crucial role. This is a sad truth, but it is indeed the case. Signs and influential platforms often highlight the importance of emotional appeal and the likability factor in winning arguments.

Philosopher David Hume posits that humans are not fundamentally rational creatures but rather emotional beings. According to Hume, if you want to influence someone, it is better to appeal to their emotions rather than their sense of logic. The key is to engage their "better nature" or the emotions that align with your argument, rather than attacking their capacity for rational thought.

The Power of Money and Influence

A less-discussed reason why good arguments don't always win is the influence of financial and political power. Money and power often drive arguments and debates. The saying "the devil always shits on the greatest heap" in German underscores this concept. Essentially, the more money or power someone has, the more likely they are to accumulate even more, creating a cyclical effect.

In political contexts, those with power can use their influence to shape the argument in their favor, often at the expense of those with less power. This dynamic can create a situation where the loudest and most financially supported voices dominate the conversation, even when their arguments are not necessarily the strongest or most valid.

Conclusion

To summarize, good arguments don't always win because of a variety of factors. Lack of understanding, deep-seated beliefs, emotional appeal, and the influence of financial and political power all contribute to the complexity of winning an argument. Understanding these factors can help improve the effectiveness of your arguments and increase your chances of success.