|
(Note: This
tactic is still in "outline" phase. More to come on this subject.)
Technique: Provide
a definition of the situation that is most advantageous to your point of
view. For every situation, there are infinite variations of perception.
The key is to convince listeners that your perception is the correct perception.
The technique to use for this purpose can be implemented either to 1) define
the situation initially or 2) alter the definition if your opponent has
already defined it. There are four lines of offense/defense used to define
the situation:
-
Deny the Facts
- "That's not true. The truth is…"
-
Challenge the definition
of the action - "Yes, he did hit him,
but it was not assault and battery"
-
Challenge the quality
of the action - "It was assault and battery,
but done under extenuating circumstances and with good intent."
-
Challenge the right
of the court to try the case - "This court
has neither the authority nor the jurisdiction to try this case". This
could easily be applied to: Challenge the rightor authority of an individual/organization
to judge a given action or person.
Begin with the first
line of defense and proceed to the next only if the prior one is impossible
to implement or simply fails to work. Using this technique, you will see
that even the most (seemingly) concrete situations are open to interpretation.
(See "Setting the Agenda" and "Framing the Debate")
|
