“The aim of argument should not be victory, but progress.” (Karl Popper)

Have you ever been in an argument? Of course you have. Everyone has. When you were IN the argument, was your goal to WIN? Of course it was. That seems to be nearly everyone’s goal. To be victorious over the person you’re arguing with. To triumph in some way.

You can’t really win an argument

But we don’t realize that when it comes to arguing—ALMOST NO ONE REALLY WINS. In arguments, just about everyone loses. The person who wins the POINT is usually the person who LOSES THE RELATIONSHIP. Maybe not permanently. But rest assured the relationship is damaged in some way.

So you either win the argument or you win the person. Only you can decide. Only I can decide. The personal growth expert Dale Carnegie told us this more than 80 years ago.

He points out in his first book, How to Win Friends and Influence People, that you CAN’T WIN AN ARGUMENT. He said this because if you lose the argument—you lose; and if you WIN the argument—you lose. 

He said that even if you triumph over the other person and shoot their argument full of holes. Then what? You’ll feel fine. But what about the OTHER PERSON? You’ve made them feel inferior. You’ve hurt their pride. And they will resent your triumph. In fact, they will resent YOU!

A brief word about Karl Popper

Karl Popper was born in Vienna, Austria in 1902. He was one of the most influential philosophers of science in the 20th century. His work is notable for its wide influence within the philosophy of science field, and within a broader social context.

Popper devoted his life to helping people understand the difference between true science and metaphysical or mythological or theoretical claims. It gets complicated, but put as simply as I can put it, Popper believed that BAD SCIENTISTS seek merely to confirm their theories as true. While GOOD SCIENTISTS seek to test their theories with an honest acceptance that they might be proven false. 

This might sound self-defeating. But Popper believed that a scientific theory remained just a THEORY until it was PROVEN through attempts to FALSIFY IT. An illustration should help.

All swans are white

Suppose you are a scientist and you come up with the theory that ALL SWANS ARE WHITE. In fact, you have never SEEN a black swan, so your theory seems plausible. And as long as you find only WHITE SWANS, your theory remains strong.

As a BAD SCIENTIST, you would spend your time and energy searching for MORE WHITE SWANS that confirm your theory. Every time you discover another white swan, your theory seems more firm and more airtight.

But a GOOD SCIENTIST doesn’t merely search for confirmation of what they already believe. They search for what may DISPROVE what they already believe. It’s through the inability to DISPROVE their theory that it’s given increasing credibility.

So as a good scientist you begin your earnest search for a BLACK SWAN. In a sense you don’t want to find a black swan. Because if you find a black swan, your theory will be disproven. You don’t want your theory to be disproven, but confirmed.

On the other hand you do want to find a black swan. Because if you find a black swan, you’ll know that your theory is WRONG. Which may disappoint you in the short-term. But in the end you’ll be glad that you’ve FOUND THE TRUTH ABOUT SWANS. You’ll be gratified because you now know what is TRUE—not just what confirms your current belief.

A good scientist has the courage to face what they may not want to know. A good scientist is not afraid to test their theories and put them at risk. A good scientist knows that the only way a theory can really be tested is if it’s confronted with data that might FALSIFY IT. A scientist afraid to know the truth is not a good scientist.

It gets worse

But a bad scientist not only searches for data to confirm what they already believe—they often reject new data that contradicts it. So the bad scientist that discovers a black swan may conclude:

• Somebody must have painted a white swan BLACK.
• Maybe the black swan fell into a vat of black paint.
• Maybe the black swan is a freak of nature and can be rejected as evidence.

This probably sounds ridiculous. It IS ridiculous. But we often do similar things ourselves. We reject what is clearly the truth simply because we prefer not to believe it. We reject what contradicts our position and cling to what is wrong or untrue because we’re uncomfortable admitting we’ve been wrong. We don’t like to be contradicted. We don’t like to be proven wrong. We like to believe that what we believe is what should be believed.

The aim of argument

It should now be clear enough why Karl Popper would have said:

The aim of argument should not be victory, but progress.

By “progress,” Popper means TRUTH. He means that the aim of argument should not be to prove one person right and the other person wrong. Or prove one group right and the other group wrong. The aim of argument is to HEAR OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS, and TOGETHER arrive at the truth. Arriving at truth is PROGRESS. Arriving at truth is what Karl Popper lived for. It should be what you and I live for too. It’s truth that matters—not our theories or our opinions.

But it’s our RESISTANCE that leads us to NOT EVEN LISTEN to those whose viewpoints we don’t agree with. Much less seriously CONSIDER their viewpoint. We don’t even want to HEAR what they believe to be true—much less EMBRACE IT.

But this is a grave mistake. For it limits our own growth. It limits our growth in knowledge, in understanding, and in wisdom. It stifles our development. It hinders our progress. It’s only by pursuing what we don’t know that we grow. And a large part of that pursuit is the WILLINGNESS to hear what we currently disagree with. With the acceptance of the possibility that we may need to CHANGE our viewpoint. A change that will HELP US, not hurt us.

Some practical suggestions

So given Popper’s quotation and its wisdom, here are a few things to remember.

1. Remember that the aim of argument is not victory, but progress.
2. Remember that we grow through the acquisition of new truth.
3. Remember that we acquire new truth when we’re open to changing our current position.
4. Remember that even when we “WIN” an argument, we may lose in the relationship.
5. Remember that an argument should be a mutual pursuit of truth.

Conclusion

If we insist on approaching those who disagree with us as an opportunity to set them straight. Or argue them into accepting our position. Even if we’re victorious in proving our point. Even if our arguments are solid and indisputable. We’re unlikely to convert the other person to our point of view. And we may do irreparable harm to the relationship in the process.

We should be willing to be shown what we don’t currently know or understand. If we are, growth is almost inevitable. Progress should be our aim. Growth should be our goal.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

You can receive Quotation Celebration automatically in your email inbox by clicking the FOLLOW button at the bottom of this screen and leaving your email address.

You can also find Quotation Celebration on Facebook.

Your comments are most welcome.

Thank you for reading Quotation Celebration.

Copyright © 2018 by Samuel Rodenhizer
All Rights Reserved