How to reframing in a argument like 'Thank you for smoking'



Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests
Post new topic Reply to topic   Board index » Inner Game » Beliefs and Confidence Building, Self-Esteem, and General Inner Game




Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:34 pm 
Offline
New to MPUA Forum

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:06 am
Posts: 9
Location: London
I watched the film 'Thank you for smoking' I was just astonished how effective main character was at reframing in conversation. He was promoting smoking, he was able to change people's frame at looking at smoking and he was so effective.
I remember a scene in the movie where main character is interacting with his son states that "Beauty of an argument is that if you argue correctly your never wrong"

I done some research found out the person that wrote novel 'Thank for smoking' was a speech writer for president. i think writer intentionally chose the main character to promote smoking, he wanted the readers to understand you get away with anything if argue correctly and also this is what politicians are doing to us.

so my question is where i can learn to reframe argument to benefit me. or any book on argument and debating? Is there any books to help me out.

Thanks you in advance. :)

_________________
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. [/b]


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:36 pm 
Offline
PUA Forum Leader
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 12:27 pm
Posts: 2817
A good book is 'Being logical: a guide to good thinking' by D. Q. Mclnerny.

What the guy did in Thank you for smoking was intentionally abuse locial argumentation to further his own goals. A lot of times people will make errors when arguing their point, and fall victim to what is called fallacious reasoning. But you can also intentionally frame an argument using a false premise in order to lend credence to something that you know to be untrue or unethical. This is the very foundation of lying.

Remember when Bill Clinton said he never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky? He knew damn well that getting a blowjob is sexual relations. But when confronted with that admission, he reframed it by saying that he intended the term "sexual relations" to mean vaginal intercourse, which he and Monica did not engage in. Therefore he didn't have sexaul relations with her and was not actually telling a lie. This is a prime example of a semantic argument, where one intentionally redefines or manipulates the meaning of a word or term in order to validate their own specious argument.

_________________
“Nothing is impossible, the word itself says 'I'm possible'!” ~Audrey Hepburn


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Can we be honest?

We want your email address. Let me send you the best seduction techniques ever devised... because they are really good.
close-link