The Ransberger Pivot

“Liar, liar, pants on fire!” –an ineffective strategy to win a verbal debate

For all of you dear people who enjoy stirring up debates or find yourselves winning arguments, but losing friends. Here are some alternative ideas and strategies.

As you already know, instantly correcting a false statement by an adversary feels good. But it’s usually not the best idea. Even if you’re right, you’ve stirred an even deeper emotion in your adversary, which may cause them to more staunchly entrench in their battle against you.

What’s more, there are other, more effective strategies to come out ahead in your debate or conflict.

If their false statement is an unequivocal factual error, simply make note of it and wait. Very likely, the truth will eventually come out and the speaker will stand corrected. Then it’s your choice whether or not to state matter-of-factly, “That’s just the latest in a long line of verbal prevarications.”

If their untruth goes unchallenged and is about to impact a decision being made today, then find a way to bring it up gently and judiciously. Something like, “A point of order. There was some discussion earlier suggesting titanium would be less expensive, but my notes say that stainless steel is about 20 percent cheaper.” Or, “I may be wrong, but I thought we agreed at the summer family picnic that grandma’s would be the best place for Thanksgiving.”

Remember always to keep your long-term goal in mind, which is to make the right choice, not to make your adversary look bad.

Another way to turn a disagreement around without verbally bludgeoning a speaker is to use a debate technique known as the Ransberger Pivot, first described in 1982 by Ray Ransberger and Marshall Fritz.

The three-part methodology changes the framework of a conflict by putting opposing parties on the same side. Instead of attacking your adversary, you strategically find common ground and advance the conversation as peers. It begins with respectful listening and, perhaps, asking open-ended questions such as, “Why do you feel that way?” Continue listening until you find a position of common ground that you can articulate. “That’s exactly right…” “I think we’re on the same page here…” “You’ve hit on something that’s also important to me…”

After you listen and validate their position, then you can explain why your position is a viable solution to your mutual concern.

The point here is that saying, “You’re wrong!” is almost always a dead end to any kind of mutually beneficial agreement. Helping your adversary “save face” is the way to go.

The Ransberger Pivot works in the workplace, government, volunteer committees, neighborhood conflicts, and even with your spouse or teenager. Just don’t use it too often, or your occasional adversary will begin to see through your clever methodology.