We’ve all heard the adage, “It’s not what you say but how you say it.” This is usually taken to mean that a hostile or angry tone can undermine one’s content and turn off the audience. While this is certainly true, there is another aspect to this adage that we must keep in mind.
Years ago, before I understood this, I had an experience that illustrates my point. I was having a conversation with a young man, and at one point he proclaimed, “Jimmy Carter was one of our greatest Presidents.” I immediately responded in a calm voice that I thought Carter was one of the worst Presidents in history. You can probably imagine how well that was received. The young man said, “I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree,” and the conversation ended.
It is extremely doubtful that I would have changed his mind if the conversation had continued. We both would have likely stated a series of facts trying to prove our case. And in the end, neither of us would have changed our mind.
But what if I had responded, “That’s an interesting view. Why do you admire Carter?” He would have probably been eager to explain his reasons. We would have had a discussion. I would have had an opportunity to explain why I think that Carter was horrible. But that opportunity never materialized because of how I expressed my view.
In retrospect, my initial response was motivated by an “all or nothing” attitude. I wanted to get him to completely change his mind, and anything short of that would be a failure. And so, I made an explicit counterclaim hoping to have the chance to let me explain the folly of his ways. I didn’t get that chance.
We will seldom change someone’s mind in a single conversation, and if we are discussing a significant or fundamental issue, we never will. But we can move our audience closer to our position, and that is movement in the right direction.
If I had taken that approach with the young man, I may have been able to get him to question some of his conclusions. I may have been able to help him understand the proper way to evaluate a President. If I had started him in the right direction, his own intellectual honesty would have ultimately led him to the conclusion I wanted him to adopt.
I could have disagreed with him in a way that would have made him much more receptive to my position. I could have made it clear that I thought he was wrong without immediately stating that he was wrong. My failure wasn’t the idea that I expressed, but rather the way that I said it.