The problem, as Ben Shapiro puts it in this must-read, is that “because conservatives don’t think about how to win that they constantly lose” in confrontations with leftists. The solution is to stop taking the bullying and learning to argue for victory.
Among Shapiro’s rules for beating the left in confrontations are:
Be willing to take a punch. (conservatives tend to shy away from confrontations because the left is rhetorically violent; but it is important “to walk toward the fire.” )
Hit hard, hit first. (leftists stage muggings; instead of fighting by Marquis of Queensberry rules, conservatives need to accept the strategy Mike Tyson: “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”)
Immediately frame the debate. (“When you’re discussing global warming , for example, the proper question is not whether man is causing global warming but whether man can fix global warming—a question to which the universally acknowledged answer is no unless we are willing to revert to the pre industrial age.”)
There are eight more rules that will allow a conservative to debate a leftist and destroy him. How to Debate Leftists and Destroy Them is not just a “how to” book. It is a survival manual.
By far one of the most succinct and to the point discussions on debating someone from the opposite side of the isle (i.e., a leftest minded liberal.) Just as discussed in his book that the left has one play to knock you down and get you off your game. But a debate with a liberal minded individual is, in fact, a war. And you must be willing to strike first and strike hard! And keep striking until they are finished. This is one of the greatest failing of the conservative movement because they believe that they can overcome all these hits with something substantive…but people only see and understand when you have been knocked out…we all have this failing because we were brought up, overall with a sense of fair play. But in a war, all stops must be pulled and you must be willing to win the war, not just the argument.
Without a doubt, a very good read and worthwhile information! It is a short book and would & could very easily be put to memory and to the test!
Godspeed & Good Reads!
Filed under Books, eBook, Education, History, Issues, Law, News, Politics, Reading, war, Writing
Imagine a crowded arena full of Christians, Muslims, and curious onlookers packed in to hear the outcome of one of the greatest debates in all of history. If Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, Christianity is false. But if Jesus was resurrected, Christianity is true and Islam is false. The stakes are high.
Paul Meets Muhammad imagines a futuristic face-off between two religious heavyweights, each speaking on the validity of their doctrines, forming arguments and rebuttals while citing evidence from the Qur’an and the Gospel accounts. Intriguing and entertaining, this page-turner uniquely offers a comprehensive defense of Jesus’ resurrection and of Christianity itself.
The Logos edition of this work on preaching is fully searchable and easily accessible. Scripture passages link directly to your English translations and to the original language texts, and important theological concepts link to dictionaries, encyclopedias, and the wealth of resources in your digital library.
- Addresses contemporary philosophical issues
- Defends the Christian faith, Jesus’ resurrection, and Scripture’s inerrancy
- Presents a comparative debate between Christian and Muslim views on the resurrection
- Into the Future
- Paul’s Opening Statement
- Muhammad’s Opening Statement
- Paul’s Rebuttal
- Muhammad’s Rebuttal
- Discussion Period: Part One
- Discussion Period: Part Two
- Discussion Period: Part Three
- Discussion Period: Part Four
- Discussion Period: Part Five
- Discussion Period: Part Six
- Discussion Period: Part Seven
- Muhammad’s Closing Statement
- Paul’s Closing Statement
- Moderator’s Conclusion
I found this to be a fascinating book. While in some instances it portray a realism, it also portrayed some instances (based upon recent events) of naiveté under similar circumstances. However, I went into the reading of this book solely from the position of grasping other, or newer, concepts of Apologetic argumentation. Perhaps I picked up a few others, while I also saw room for expansion into other arguments based upon my understanding of the Muslim religion and culture.
There are numerous avenues to pursue your reason(s) to read this book as a Christian, or as a studier of the fine art of argumentation, as a philosopher (or one in training), or even as a Logician.
Godspeed & Good Reads!