

The Art of Being Right - jgrahamc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right

======
DanielRibeiro
Related:

A list of rhetological fallacies[1]

Conversational Terrorism[2]

[1]
[http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetolo...](http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-
fallacies/)

[2] <http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html>

------
fbomb
Just because you win an argument doesn't mean that you are right.

~~~
pilgrim689
Did you even read the first sentence of the article?

~~~
ewolf
Schopenhauer is not entirely ironic about the unrelatedness of truth and
argument. It is true that usually, both parties believe to know it and
therefore, it is unknown most of the time. It is also true that, just because
you are not able to reply to one of your opponent's arguments, that does not
mean that he is right and you are wrong. Countless other arguments for your
position may still convince you and thus, some tricks can be useful —
especially, if an audience is to be convinced.

------
jcr
jgc, is it wise to give HN a list of 38 methods to show up an opponent in a
debate when said methods were written as sarcasm? ;-)

~~~
ewolf
It's somewhat sarcastic because Schopenhauer states that there is no
relationship between the art of debate/convincing and the truth or seeking the
truth. His advice, however, is perfectly valid and can be used and, to some
extent, is used intuitively, every day.

I'd recommend reading the entire essay, though - the summary on Wikipedia is
very brief and also, this is the only essay written by a philosopher I've ever
read that actually made me laugh.

