How to convince someone: 4 keys to persuasion

To know how to influence others, you have to know that we are more emotional than rational.

Knowing how to convince someone is not easy because, first of all, in order to do so, we have to reject an idea that we tend to take for granted in a natural way: that persuasion consists simply of providing coherent and logical arguments. To influence other people, whether they are men or women, customers, friends or relatives, we have to go beyond the rational.

It is true that in order to change the opinions of others it is necessary to give them a new perspective on reality that is functional and does not make them feel ignorant, but there are many more elements at play. Many of these elements, moreover, are anything but logical.

In this article we will see what are the keys to take into account to make our attempts to convince someone as efficient and effective as possible. Of course, the possibility of modify another person's beliefs does not depend does not depend solely on us, but we can play our cards skillfully to maximize our chances of success.

How to convince others effectively

If you are interested in having clear guidelines on how to convince someone, follow these basic principles.

1. Always be clear about who you want to convince

There are people who approach debates and exchanges of opinions as if the objective were simply to make the truth prevail over falsehoods. That is to say, with a goal set in the abstract, in which truthful information, by the fact of being truthful, always ends up convincing everyone who is listening. However, this is a mistake if what we want is not simply to feel morally superior to someone, but to really convince.

Trying to change the opinion of the person we are talking to is not the same as trying to influence the person we are talking to. is not the same as trying to influence the beliefs of the audience watching a discussion in which we are participating.. In the second case, those who want to win over the audience use their opponent's discourse in their favor, without expecting him to change to get closer to their own, but taking advantage of his position to convey a message. Thus, in these cases, what is transmitted is not simply what one says, but the set formed by what one says and the way in which the opponent reacts to it.

For example, exposing the inconsistencies of what the other person says and drawing attention to the fact that he/she does not admit rectifications can be explained as a symptom that he/she does not understand what is being talked about. This strategy, on the other hand, would be wrong if we wanted to convince that person, since the effect of this is to make him/her adopt a more defensive attitude, making it more difficult for him/her to change his/her mind because of cognitive dissonance. This will be discussed below.

2. Beware of cognitive dissonance

Although it may seem paradoxical, being aware of clear signs that we are wrong to hold ideas that we identify with us, tends to make us cling even more to those erroneous beliefs, in a more irrational way.This means that knowing more (by knowing more) than we did at the beginning, we are more likely to be more irrational and uncritical than we were at the beginning. That is, knowing more (knowing the limitations of what we thought we knew), makes us know worse.

The reason for this is that if the clash between one's own idea and another new or foreign idea is stated in a very clear and direct way, we prefer to "cheat" so that we do not have to deal with the uncertainty of not knowing uncertainty of not knowing which opinion is really the one we should defend. Thus, we can act as if we really do not doubt what we believe and live in that comfortable fiction.

Thus, in order to convince someone, we must be careful not to approach the dialogue as a battle of egos. What is apparently a clear defeat and humiliation does not translate into the fact of convincing someone, but quite the opposite; if we "win" in this way, it is most likely that we will simply be annulled for another future conversation, since that person will have labeled us as a slanderer or demagogue.

Much more useful than that is not to come in haughtily asserting great truths, but to approach the debate in a collaborative manner. Without hiding the fact that from the beginning you think differentlybut trying to make the conversation constructive and useful to both parties. From this principle, treating with respect those who disagree with us, the appropriate thing to do is to introduce doubts in these people about what they think they know, offering at the same time explanations or alternative positions that help to reduce the uncertainty that has just been exposed.

3. Show your limitations

To be skillful in convincing someone, something that is very powerful is to talk about one's ignorance. If we say directly that we don't know certain things, as long as they are not central to the debate, we reveal a special kind of authority, we reveal a special kind of authorityThe person willing to honestly transmit his or her knowledge gaps, so that knowing them, the rest can decide whether to join that position or not.

4. Appeal to real life

Unless it is a discussion of deeply philosophical issues, avoid arguing on the basis of abstractions, avoid arguing on the basis of abstractions.Always speak on the basis of concrete facts, real or imaginary, even if only to give examples. This shows the practical significance of your position, and makes it clear that you are not speaking out of detachment from your own ideas.