Arguing With a Phlegmatic Melancholy
If you do a Google search on “how to argue” you will get about 45,000,000 search engine results on the topic. They span the gambit for pieces of satire about the futility of argument to long think pieces written by the legal community about building a preponderance of evidence.
But, what most of us are interested in is a much more simple concept of how to present our beliefs intelligently and how to assess the argument of others fairly.
The temperament experts at arguing are the Phlegmatic Melancholy persons. They have the keen analytical insight to explore any argument for fundamental flaws. Socrates was most likely a Phlegmatic Melancholy.
Because I have always been a fan of intuitive logic and one of the greatest intuitive thinkers of all time was Socrates, I studied the Socratic Filter for a way to adapt it to the assessment of argument. After some time I came up with something that I think works fairly well.
It basically boils down to the following two questions, that I like to call “The Phlegmatic Melancholy Filter.”
1. Why do you say that?
2. So, what?
If your argument, or anyone else’s can pass this assessment then it is a valid argument. If it can’t then it is just so much air, or ink, or pixelation. If I can’t come up with an argument that matches these two criteria legitimately, then I won’t make the argument. Likewise, I assess the argument of others the same way. If they can’t make a case with those two items then they are working from a prejudicial point of view, and debate is pointless because they will never admit defeat.
Here is an example. Two colleagues are debating the acceptability of “Casual Friday.” Neither is particularly vested but they polar feelings about the issue.
Person 1: “Casual Friday’s is good for staff moral.”
Person 2: “Why do you say that?”
Person 1: “It’s obvious! When people come to work on Friday in casual clothes they are smiling.”
Person 2: “So, what? They could be smiling because they are looking forward to the weekend, or Starbucks actually got their order right this morning.”
Person 1: “Yes, but people will tell you they are happier in jeans.”
Person 2: “So, what? People will tell you many things. Can you prove their demeanor changes?”
As you can see, any argument not firmly founded fails the The Phlegmatic Melancholy Filter test.
Try it out.
Elemental Value Added Truth: A man convinced against his will, is unconvinced.