3 Ways to Approach an Argument — and Which Works Best

Before arguing against someone we must first frame their position so we can structure our argument.

Let’s look at three ways to do this, from least to most effective. Let’s also imagine we wish to argue against someone whose position is pro-life, that abortion should be illegal. We’ll then see how these different ways frame that position before arguing against it:

1: Straw-man the argument. Framing the argument as uncharitably as possible to make it easier to win the argument. Straw-manning the pro-life position might look like: ‘The pro-life position is wrong because it is nothing but misogynistic and patriarchal and this wrong because…’. Doing this might make you feel like you’ve ‘won’, but it’s unlikely it’ll change anyone’s mind, and it’s considered a logical fallacy.

2: Steel-man the argument. Conversely, framing their argument in the strongest possible terms to make it as hard as possible for you to argue against. Steel-manning the pro-life position might look like ‘You take the pro-life position because you believe it the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy, single motherhood, and promote safe sex, however, I don’t agree because…’ This is more effective because if you successfully argue against their position after steel-manning, it’ll be far more convincing.

3: Star-man the argument. Not only framing their argument in the strongest possible terms, but also assuming they make it with the best of intentions. Star manning the pro-life position might look like ‘You take the pro-life position because you believe it the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy, single motherhood, and promote safe sex, and you want that because you believe it will make society safer and happier. However, I don’t agree because…’ This not only makes your argument more convincing, it also ensures the argument’s made in the best possible faith.

So we should aim to star-man our opponents as much as possible, as it helps foster a culture of compassionate and fruitful debate.