General characteristics of the dispute

General characteristics of the dispute

The world in which a modern man lives is woven from contradictions. For this reason, it is more polemical than ever before. And the future of a person depends to a large extent on whether he will manage to organize and make fruitful and effective communication a vital value (it is the essence of communication processes, including speech ones) in the most diverse spheres of human life in politics, business, science, between generations, representatives of different cultures, and so on.

Today, at the end of the 20th century, most of humanity realized the very simple and obvious fact that only a few judgments about the world are true and do not require proof. But the lion’s share of our judgments presupposes active thinking activity, proceeding in the mode of dispute (discussions,


How dull, dull, uninteresting, boring would be a person’s life if speech communications between people were reduced to a strict and dispassionate statement of the “state of affairs.” In fact, in communicative processes, besides utterances expressing this or that state of affairs, there are motives, questions, assessments, concurrences and objections, up to the rejection of something. In addition, a certain coloring, the character of communicative acts is given by the manner of behavior, poses, expressions of persons. We can find all this in disputes.

The dispute is one of the main forms of human communication, within which the positions of the opposing sides are clarified, an optimal solution of the problem is developed, “truth is born.” The conclusion from the above is extremely simple. “The Luxury of Human Communication” (A. Saint-Exupery) is a reward for the exhausting work of the mind, a high level of logical culture and culture of behavior, as well as for the filigree mastery of the art of dispute

Dispute is an act of verbal communication, however not every communicative process is a controversy. We fix the essence of the dispute through the logical operation of the definition. Dispute is a communicative process, within which there is a comparison of points

of view, positions of the parties involved in it, and each of them seeks to reasonably approve its understanding of the issues under discussion and to refute the arguments of the other party. A rare dispute ends with the unconditional victory of one of the parties, but this does not detract from the value of this communicative act. First, since ideas compete in a dispute, its participants are enriched ideologically: the exchange of ideas, unlike the exchange of things, is more effective. B. Shaw justified this thesis: if you have one apple and I have one, then when you exchange them with you, and I will have one apple each; but if you have one idea, but I have another and we exchange them, then as a result, each of the races will have two ideas. Secondly, having carried out the process of the dispute, the parties come to a deeper understanding of their own position and the position of their opponent. Third, in a dispute, you can learn something new and thereby supplement your knowledge and broaden your horizons.

The art of arguing was called the eristika. Eristika is an integral art arising at the intersection of knowledge and skills, developed by logic, psychology, ethics and rhetoric. With this approach, the art of the dispute is characterized by two main features: evidence and persuasiveness. Proof is a logical influence on the opponent by the compulsion of reasoning. Conviction is a psychological influence on an opponent, aimed at perceiving an idea. Within the framework of the dispute, evidence and credibility are relatively independent. The following combinations are possible: a) conclusively and convincingly; b) Evidence, but not convincing; c) not conclusively, but convincingly; d) and not conclusive, and not convincing. The ideal option to which one should strive in any dispute, – Evidence and persuasiveness of reasoning at the same time. For more than two thousand years of its history, eristika has developed general recommendations, the implementation of which contributes to increasing the fruitfulness of the dispute:

• If it is possible to reach agreement without dispute, it is better to use it.

• Do not argue over trifles; if you really argue, then only on fundamental issues.

• The ground for the dispute forms the presence of incompatible positions relative to the same subject; If the positions are compatible, there is no need for a dispute.

• The dispute must be objective, and the subject of the dispute is sufficiently clear and unchanged throughout its entire length.

• A dispute is possible only if there is a certain commonness of the initial positions that can become a source of initial understanding between the disputants, as well as a certain amount of knowledge about the subject matter of the dispute.

• The dispute involves following certain laws and rules of logic, ethics and psychology.

• Dispute should not be an end in itself, in a dispute personal attacks are unacceptable; remember that a dispute should be a means of achieving the truth, developing an optimal solution.

• In a dispute, you should use only correct methods that can contain elements of cunning, surprise, attack, but not lies, denigrating and degrading the dignity of the opponent, substituting the subject of the dispute, etc. Strive to present your thoughts briefly, cohesively and beautifully. The types of dispute are very diverse. The dispute can be constructive (comradely) or destructive (hostile), oral or written, organized or spontaneous, thorough or superficial, meaningful or formal. The listed types of dispute are distinguished by external signs. In life, more attention is paid to the content aspects of the dispute, so one of the important points is the choice of the type of dispute (discussion or polemic) that is determined by specific circumstances.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
General characteristics of the dispute