The debate "Yelling is the best way to get people to listen to you get your point across win an argument ect." was started by
November 17, 2015, 10:00 pm.
11 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 35 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Alex posted 5 arguments to the agreers part.
historybuff posted 1 argument, PsychDave posted 1 argument, Sosocratese posted 4 arguments, Apollo8 posted 2 arguments, Lane posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Alex, DannyknowsItAll, liberalssuck, Tiredandred, Band_Nerd_24, MarlemR and 5 visitors agree.
historybuff, PsychDave, AstroSpace, Sosocratese, Evan, invincible_01, Apollo8, confident, MrShine, thekid, Lane, Rokai, Wookie, WaspToxin, keponefactory, lawyer_to_be, andy91, curlyyxx and 17 visitors disagree.
I think you're redirecting the point. In the very first place, screaming and yelling has a threshold with so little difference. Try and look at the dictionary, or at a thesaurus, or even ask a friend. No right-minded person will believe you quite bluntly when you say screaming and yelling are two different things. Even Encarta dictionary and Merriam-Webster dictionary considers them as synonyms.
Moreover, you only tackled the first phrase of my argument. Let me reiterate it for you if you did not understand or that if you were so engraved in that supposedly blitzkrieg argument. What I meant was that the meat or the component of your argument always weigh more than how you actually say it. That's why you see people that no matter how calm they are, their message always stands on top. It's because for the people who are listening, they always find the meat more interesting than the way they say it. You don't come to a lecture expecting the teacher to scream or yell or whisper at you. You go there expecting to take in the meat or the concern of the lesson. Likewise, when you aggressively try to embed your argument to a negligent person, all the more that that recipient will not listen. You are all the more giving him enough reason to neglect your ideas. You have to stay calm as in that situation he too will remain calm. Try to listen to his own arguments and then clarify & rebut him after he have spoken his/her arguments. By taking the time to listen, he too will open up and listen to you. That's why, when you try and disect debate tournaments, there is always a fixed amount of time given to people. Because of that you need not scream like a crazy old goat. You give your arguments with the right intonation and by then, your idea is already directed at everyone in the room. You make it interesting, as a matter of method. And that's how you properly forward your message.
Yelling is definitely not the best way to get your point across. It is a form of communication, and it does get your point across. But it isn't the best way to do so. When your teacher starts yelling at you and you don't think you've done anything wrong, you'll get annoyed at them, and that will turn heated, which ultimately hurts the relationship between two people.
When you yell at someone, they don't feel like they are being heard because well you're being too loud. So they raise their voice, and that automatically sets you both off, next you know you're both going at it.
Yelling is amazing for training. When you're in the gym and your coach is yelling at you over and over and over, that yelling stimulates your desire to get it done, it motivates you. Every athlete wants their coach to show them respect, to recognize their skill. When a coach tells you "great catch" in football as you're coming off the field, you feel good. Why? Because every other time he talks to you he is yelling and seems angry. The good feeling of finally hearing him say "good" motivates and energizes you. So in sports, yelling is huge for motivation.
Not so much in an argument. When you are face to face with a friend, you don't yell at them. You talk. You listen. You try to understand. That's the best, the most effective, way to argue.
yelling is much different then screaming and blackmailing. blackmailing is just plain wrong, and screaming is disorderly and uneffective, because it is disorderly and out of controll. yelling is more controlled then screaming and has order
I believe in matter over manner, such that no matter how you scream or blackmail the person (a form of manner/way in which we express ourselves), the ideas you forward (matter/knowledge/information) is what will actually determine the legitimate winner. So no need to scream, people. Just point out in an orderly manner your exact dazzling matter and win the debate like a pro hahahaha
It really depends, if you're talking to the person who is shy and inferior, it's very likely that they will listen to you, but if those people are the same mind as you and chances are they would yell as well. Then how are you going to communicate with those people?
People yelling in leadership positions is not really a style of leadership, it's an adjunct of their personality. Usually people who yell as part of their leadership are great leaders because of the organizational skills they have, because of the decision making skills they have, etc... Harvard business school published an article about it. They claim that yelling is effective only if there is a certain trust already established by the leadership. However, yelling without that established trust tends to raise more questions since a lot of people find it shows a weakness by the leader to communicate ideas effectively.
I can certainly concede the argument that yelling is an effective leadership style in certain circumstances.
let's only talk about 1 at a time. let's continue leadership. all successfull politicians, and sports coaches yell. they yell because it's the most effective way, and successfull people use the most effective way. if you can name a effective politician, businessman, or sports coach who does not yell, then go ahead.
Then the only thing you've demonstrated is that yelling is a style of leadership. However, you have to establish that it's the most effective. You've also failed to include that portion in your initial claim however.
You have yet to demonstrate any evidence that yelling is an effective way to argue and have not yet refuted any claims to the contrary. I'm assuming you're therefore conceding the portion on it being an effective strategy for arguing.
I'm talking about both leadership, and arguments.
Again, Alex what you're describing is not an argument. The baseball coach and player aren't having an argument.
This is the definition of an argument since you don't seem to understand the criticism I presented.
1. an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one.
2 a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.
A baseball coach yelling at his player for messing up is not an argument. There is no exchange of ideas happening. It's one sided. You're talking about leadership styles not arguments.
let's say I'm at a basketball practice. no crowd noise, people can hear you if you talk normally. does a coach still yell if they someone messing up. yes. why? because yelling is the most effective way. it let's the player know who is in charge.
Yelling in sports in not the same as having an argument. Yelling in an argument causes a response known as amygdala hijacking. It is a natural response which is part of the fight or flight response system. Making a person feel attacked means they no longer filter information through the frontal cortex. They don't process the information being presented. While you may be able to get someone to give stupid responses by using this, it is impossible to actually get information through to them and change their mind, therefore defeating the point of having an argument.
when yelling you need to do it right. you must be in control, if you are not incontrol, that is bad. a good leader needs to be able to take charge. people see you in charge of you are yelling.
ramdomly yelling things I'd the worst, but yelling in controll, and yelling correct things works real well.
I play a lot of sports, and in sports yelling is a must. outside of sports yelling also works well too.
yelling at a person makes you seem horrible and if people see you as a horrible person they'll hate you and if people hate you, you will not get hired for a job, of you don't get hired for a job you will starve, if you starve you will try to steal food, if you try to steal food you'll go to prison and if you go to prison you'll get in a fight and if you get In a fight you'll get stabbed to death with a shank. At least that's what my friend told me.
The best way to win an argument is to put your self in your opponent's position and evaluate what would change your mind. Sometimes there is nothing that could, and sometimes your opponent's reasoning is just too different from your own for this to be effective, but it is more effective than shouting at them.
once you start yelling people get defensive. they are much less receptive to what you have to say. it is not the best way to get your point across. if all you want is to silence opposition then its good. but since we live in a free country with freedom of speech that is not a good thing.