Tyrion Video on Frames: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NQiHtbpa8s&
Previous JP video on earning respect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsQLksbfDSo&
Jordan Peterson VS Cathy Newman Debate
How To Shut Down Conversational Bullies
Subscribe to Charisma On Command’s YouTube Account:
Have you seen the Jordan Peterson and Cathy Newman debate?
See for yourself how he deals with it and give us your opinion in the comments!
We've all found ourselves in conversation and felt attacked like we started off talking about one thing and then the other person twisted our words and before we knew it, we lost our cool, lost respect in their eyes, and maybe even acted like a jerk. Now, I don't normally do the same person twice in a row but this interview between Cathy Newman and Jordan Peterson was just too interesting of an opportunity to discuss how you can handle someone who uses subtle conversational tricks to bully you into looking dumb. So in this video, you're gonna see firsthand some of the most common tricks that people might be using on you and you're also gonna learn how to reverse those so that you can walk out of a kind of aggressive situation having earned more respect than you had going in.
So first off, to stop a conversational bully, you have to realize what's going on before it's too late. Now, typically, a person will reveal their aggressive attitude early on with their tone of voice and their word choice. Check out the rest that we will show in this video and how Jordan Peterson tackles them.
1:49 Jordan Peterson deals with so-you're-saying trap
2:39 Jordan Peterson deals with the "assuming the sale"
5:30 Jordan Peterson deals with the smash technique
7:08 But don't straw man the other person's ideas though
7:47 And visual imagery can also help
8:25 You can show them that they're already agreeing with you
Connect With Us Further:
Or if you want to see our personal stuff (regular life + playing music):
Keth Newman is a Bullier .She was put in this position because of that skill. And the only way to stop the bullier is to make them fell silly about themselves. She was not surching for the truth but her intention was to destroy a political oponent. She serves a politcal agenda that is not conservatve and Jordan naturally opposes to it.
Props to him in this interview. I would have lost my cool. She's firing off logical fallacies at an alarming rate. She would have dragged me down to her level which would have made me just as reprehensible as her. Her way of arguing is absolutely disgusting but oh so common on TV simply because it's effective.
Another strategy I often see is when they ask a bunch of questions that would take longer to answer than the time you're given. It's basically a setup from the start.
A few people are discussing the "gotcha" comment. Peterson himself addressed this on a podcast I was watching and he did say he regretted saying it and he wished he'd have handled that bit differently. But we all live and learn, even Peterson.
I am woman and I am in his audience and I am sure I am not the only one so this Cathy should go to laundry and learn how to clean her brain if she has one. I wonder if she know what it is the difference between laundry and kitchen???? By doing what she is doing she is an enemy to herself.
Cathy is doing what the network want her to do and cause a but of controversy for ratings. So the interview would have always gone this way, it's just that the producers in Cathy's ear wouldn't know where to go from there so they cut it short. Had it been an argument, they would have given it more time.
Jordan peterson sometimes twists his own words. He said that a very old painting with a double helix of snakes in it represented dna even though dna wasn’t discovered yet , in another interview he said that was just a thought ( btw when snakes mate they form a double helix ) it’s very obvious he doesn’t know anything about science and should stick to psychology
If the right and left stop throwing insults and puns maybe we can consort some peaceful disagreement. As a leftist myself, the right are right that more leftist now are getting violent...but the right however make insults, consent puns, and hateful rhetoric. And this is how the right is clever to win over the left...but it can at times be the other way around...and this is why I stopped watching the left, right, independent, CNN, FOX News, you name it...they should not get paid one penny and actually do physical work like most conservatives complain about alot of drifters don't wanna work, that's not fully true however. If they make any of those misdeeds they should get penalized with less income to a penny a year or get fired for that matter. They are paid to create rhetorical hate, slander, puns, insults, etc. more than they say any truth to just get their money. Some people on the left feel they should get more freedom than they already have and for once kinda, I agree with conservatives. Money doesn't grow on trees. But both sides must ask however where is your money going....why are things getting much worse in our current generation, it's no one in the middle/lower class of the sort. Not just the left, not just the right...I now think you all know where I am going with this...but sadly at this point I must be discrete.
She literally cannot simply conduct an interview, she has to straw man his every point, be adversarial instead of merely informative, she has to make her own points with no substantiation whatsoever while calling everything he says into question. This is what "journalism" has become. All thanks to these types who are NOT journalists in the true sense but are activists parading around as journalists.
Dude, love this video. I actually really enjoy watching Jordan Peterson interviews and your point at the very end about how he should have addressed her "emotional concerns" is on point. Lots of the videos I see of arguments or disagreements lack that. I feel like Jordan in particular is brilliant, but he never closes that gap, and I personally believe it's because he doesn't want to spell it out so simply that "hey, we both agree". Highly intellectuals tend to do this all the time and I can't understand why. With just one or two more sentences, he could have possibly shown her that she agrees with him more than not.
Kathy cleary studied her research so she could carefuly planned her attack at him. She is simply a female-icon-wannabe-journalist. She knew this would become a rating booster. What a toxic person with low self esteem and daddy issues. I bet she loves Trump.
Can we just talk about all of these tactics that Cathy Newman rolled out in expert fashion? EXPERT level. You think she didn't know that this "interview" was full of bullshit disinfo tactics masquerading as journalism? Pretty sure she flashed a couple of sixes too. Disgusting.
Is this not all just common sense? Every example you've just shown seems like something that almost any would know is some sort of passive agressive dismissal of your character/arguments rather a comparison and critique of your character/arguments.
so for example if i say:
"So your'e saying all men are violent?"
"So is it correct to say that your argument is that all men are violent?"
and asked you to pick the one where you feel the asker most likely 'cares about your opinion'. Most people would know to pick the 2nd. Even if its only gut instinct, they still know.
The biggest problem i find, with these kind of interviewers, is when they do the 'smash technique' as you call it, but rather than listing all of them in one go, they say one, wait for you to just start your answer, then quickly say the next point, making sure to talk loudly over you so you can't get a word in, and repeat 4-5 times.
I've seen people like peirs morgan, and jeremy paxman do this, and its the biggest admission that you don't actually want an answer to your question.
2100 dislikes? This is a informative/learning video. What about this content and purpose of this video is there to dislike? Or is it more likely you are disliking this video because you dont like the person in it, or his political stances. Which has nothing to do what this video's purpose is.
it's easy to win arguements.
step 1: listen
step 2: feel your gut
step3: say the truth
step4: tell ignorant dummies to fk off, bullies dont respect kindness, and you should not respect them to begnin with.
Always love the Charisma On Command videos, this is the 2nd time I watched this one, still enjoyed it. Like listening to the voice of Dave Foley (of KITH and NewsRadio fame) combined with the wisdom of Scott Adams re. persuasion, framing, linguistics -- but less verbose :) )
Wow. You put a lot of thoughtful effort into your video. I haven't heard this much energy like it in a very long time. Thank you for the work/time you put into it, and thank you for sharing. I can use what you taught.
take aggressive action against (a place or enemy forces) with weapons or armed force, typically in a battle or war.
This is the definition of attack I think u need to rethink your word choice, because you use attack way to much in this video and it’s just way out of context.
Women generally aren't smart enough to debate properly. Yes, that is what I'm saying. They use a LOT of strawman arguments, pre-supposition, they almost always get a tad too emotional during the debate and it shows in their tone of voice. I've yet to see a woman who can debate like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, etc.
All the more reason to be ashamed when you lose a debate to one...and it happens to majority of men, all the time.
Have you ever heard men say how you "can't argue with women"? Actually, not only that you can, but it's usually the easiest challenge out there. The reason why most men can't do it is because they let their own emotions overwhelm them, thus wandering into that irrational mode in which women thrive. If you have thought something through and can manage to remain calm and composed during the debate, you'll pick each and every one of their "arguments" apart...they will be forced to admit defeat, just like the female host in this video.
That's why I love it when guys complain to me how you can't argue with a woman. That has never been my experience. Women literally i.e physically run away from debating me after they see the direction in which they're heading.
Lol this is the lady who said was denied entry into a Mosque when the cameras showed that she went in and then came out for publicity. Strange how she wasn't sacked for lying. She seems very annoying in general, it is just sad to see that people who appear on TV are allowed to lie?