How do you argue against stubborn people?
First, I would avoid characterizing them as stubborn, because that can be something of a self-fulfilling prophecy, and give rise to lazy argumentation on your end. I’ve had people say to me “You always have to be right,” when in fact all they had to do was raise a convincing argument instead of attacking some perceived tendency in me.
Second, let them tell you how to argue against them by asking: “What would it take to convince you?” Then whatever it is, either demonstrate that to be the case, or find some flaw in the criterion that allows you to meet a different standard. If you can’t do either of those things, maybe you’re wrong and they’re right.
If they say “Nothing could convince me,” you might try “So are you holding that view because you are convinced that it’s true, or just to be obstinate?” If they respond that it’s the former, your job is to find out on what basis they are convinced that it’s true, and invalidate that basis. But you should also consider “Nothing could convince me” your first cue that perhaps arguing with them is a waste of breath.
Get Sam Austin’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
If you decide nonetheless to soldier on, you might try “When you say ‘Nothing could convince me,’ it sounds like you are being stubborn just for the sake of being stubborn, and I’m sure that’s not the case. So just as a thought experiment, let’s expand this to the realm of fantasy. What is the least farfetched fantasy scenario you can imagine where what I’m trying to convince you of would be true?”
What you’ve done here is threefold: first, put the person in a position where “stubborn for the sake of being stubborn” is beneath them; second, created a scenario that forces the person to think of the underlying issues as opposed to the immediate dispute; third, made the product of your opponent’s thought an argument against his own view, even if only in a theoretical.
Skilled arguers, mind you, can do this as a matter of routine, because one of the best ways to win an argument is to make the opponent’s case better than he has been able to, and then demonstrate that your case is nonetheless superior. But stubborn people find it difficult to conceive of even imaginary scenarios where they would be wrong, so at the very least you will throw a spotlight on that incapacity. If however he is able to concoct a fantasy scenario where he would be wrong, your job will be to demonstrate that the scenario and reality are not substantially different where your dispute is concerned.
