Enlightenment from the divorce between Si Wen and Lu Cheng: "correctness" does not necessarily mean "happiness"

The debates we used to contact were generally two teams of contestants, who expressed their views seriously and justly. Of course, you can't talk nonsense, but you must be justified and have a source.

The debates in the popular variety shows "The Story of Qi Dad" and "Talk Show Conference" in recent two years are really ingenious.

No matter what the contestants in the program say, whether there is evidence or not, as long as they can tell the truth, even if what they say belongs to "unreasonable sophistry", they may be regarded as truth.

There is a couple of contestants. By the way, they are not husband and wife now. They thought of wenhe.

They made their debut long ago. I remember the first contact with them should be on the talk show after 80 tonight, which is also the earliest talk show. Later, they went to the chess room and talk show conference.

Si Wen is the first female talk show actress, leaving the audience with the image of a strong woman.

And Lu Cheng's label is Sven's husband, and he laughs at himself as a soft rice eater.

In the third season of Talk Show Conference, Lu Cheng's joke is about the life of Si Wen:

"I concentrated on practicing a lot of fighting skills in the program" Seven Bullies "and practiced fighting every day. I am a professional quarreler now, so my position at home has also improved.

Every time Steven wants to quarrel, I will say to her,' Are you sure?' ? Don't challenge others' work with your hobbies. "

Of course, Si Wen did not show weakness. She said,' home is not a place to reason, but a place to talk about love.' I said,' I don't agree with you. So we quarreled, and finally, I won, and my home was gone. "

At that time, I just thought it was just a funny joke. Unexpectedly, before long, they really divorced.

Steven and Lu Cheng often bury each other in talk shows. Si Wen once said in the interview program, do you want to have a pure friendship with the opposite sex? Then get married! You can be a brother who sleeps in a bunk bed, saving a lot of trouble.

Their divorce thought officially declared: "From bunk brothers to friends."

In fact, I think it is also a good way for husband and wife to get along like brothers, as long as it suits both sides.

However, home is not a debate, and there is no need to fight for a win-win situation. I really won in the end, but it hurt my feelings.

The sentence "I can't argue clearly" is of course correct.

Everyone has different attitudes and positions, and it is inevitable that there will be arguments in chat and communication. However, in order to convince each other, it is really unnecessary for the two sides to be flushed and hurt their feelings.

What's more, blind arguments will only make the two sides more determined and more tit-for-tat. In the end, no one may convince the other side, but they will become enemies.

Even if we win the argument, it may hurt each other's hearts and make people unhappy.

Therefore, "right" is not necessarily "have fun".

How to understand it? We persuaded the other party to agree with our idea, and it may not be possible for him to cooperate with us happily and carry out our idea.

In reality, this situation is quite common. People say nice things to you, but they are "disobedient" and not active in action.

Dr. Booth, a famous American psychologist, once did a research on the topic of "People's Psychological Changes in Debate".

He used a tape recorder to record quarrels and arguments between people from all walks of life, and collected recordings of nearly 10,000 cases.

These cases include arguments between teachers and parents, between bosses and employees, between wives and husbands, and even between professional debaters, politicians and the United Nations.

By analyzing and comparing these records, Dr. Booth came to an amazing conclusion:

Those professional debaters, outstanding politicians, and various representatives of the United Nations, whose opinions are accepted in debates, are less likely to succeed than pawns and vendors in the lower classes.

What led to this conclusion?

With the deepening of the investigation, Dr. Booth found that those professional debaters, outstanding politicians and representatives of various countries to the United Nations have ever-changing means of persuading others, all in order to find out the flaws of the other side and attack them, so as to prove their wisdom and win the result.

What those salesmen or small businessmen do is to try their best to find an idea that can prove that their products are excellent and let the other party accept it sincerely.

It seems clever to find out the weakness of the other party's topic and fight back, but in fact it makes you fall into a competitive debate, and persuasion for the sake of persuasion makes it more difficult for the other party to accept your own point of view.

Carnegie, a famous American success master, once said: "There is only one way to benefit from arguments-stay away from them".

Who in this world likes to be opposed by others? Everyone wants their views to be universally recognized.

However, it is easy to express your own views, but it is difficult to accept others' views. How many people can always open their hearts and treat others with humility?

It's not just a matter of opening your heart. Different growth environments, life standards, values and attitudes are different.

Even the most common dietary tastes, there will be a dispute between the north and the south.

Can these be changed by several arguments?

In the usual chat, we can also find that whenever these topics are involved, people always argue endlessly and can't reach an agreement.

When we argue with others, if we confront each other from our own point of view with our thoughtless ideas, then no matter how strong and aggressive the other party is, it will not be persuaded by us.

On the contrary, people may resent our arrogance.

They will also try their best to tell and defend their views and argue with us with similar ideas.

This is a war with no winners but losers.

If the two people in the conversation have to compete, the result is that they both lose.

Therefore, it is wise to stay away from arguments in conversation and dialogue.

Chatting itself is to exchange views and enhance mutual feelings.

No one wants to be hit by the other party in the chat and hurt their confidence.

Therefore, a person who can chat will not hurt the feelings of both sides by arguing about a certain point of view.

There are two little rabbits arguing. Among them, the black rabbit thinks that water radish is the best radish, while the white rabbit thinks that green radish is the best radish.

Neither of the two rabbits could convince anyone, so they found a respected old rabbit to judge.

Without thinking, the old rabbit said, "I have eaten carrots for so many years and found that carrots are the best!" " "

Three rabbits, hugging each other, argued endlessly, and finally did not argue why.

We find that this is the most common reaction when people face different opinions, and it is also the most inappropriate reaction.

Because the performance of excessive excitement often makes people more impulsive, but it can't make things get a reasonable solution and can't reach the knowledge of * * *.

In fact, there are many cases of persuasion in life, just like the arguments of these three rabbits. There is no right or wrong, just different positions, there is no need to compete.

Some people say, "You can't reason with women, because men who reason and beat women are all single in the end."

Although this is a joke, it is not unreasonable, and it also shows the essence of persuasion.

Winning a quarrel doesn't mean you can convince the other side.

After having different opinions, the first thing many people think about is how to convince each other: "You must agree with me, or else …" Everyone is going to extremes.

Have you ever thought that maybe the other person can agree with your position without your persuasion?

Especially when expressing one's position, blindly adopting an argumentative attitude will not only make you look like a lotus, but also leave an arrogant and intolerant image.

If you fail in an argument, the other party will not only think you are immature, but also think you are a combative guy.

If you win the argument, you can't convince the other side.

Maybe I agree with you another day, but my heart is full of unhappiness. I'll go to war with you at the first opportunity another day.

This is really not conducive to the maintenance of the relationship, and such an approach is completely unnecessary.

Arguing for the sake of arguing can't solve any problems, but it will make people angry and hurt their feelings.

Therefore, if you don't have to argue about something, or involve major issues of right and wrong, there is no need to be unconventional and embarrass others and yourself.

There will be no winner in an argument, and even if one side seems to have the upper hand, it will not actually win the final victory.

In essence, if you win a reason, you may lose it.

As I said before, persuasion is not an argument, let alone a quarrel.

When we disagree with others, we inevitably need to spend some time trying to convince them.

This kind of situation is everywhere, and everyone has this kind of demand.

But the people who are persuaded are not your enemies and opponents.

We should treat each other as equal partners, peacefully show what you think is beneficial to him, and let him understand and agree in the shortest time.

In other words, the purpose of persuasion is to win the understanding of the other party first, and then to agree.

Many people like to argue with others. Their mouths are like a knife.

Because success after a quarrel can bring psychological sense of accomplishment and satisfaction, but it is not a very effective means.

Using utilitarian debate skills in the process of persuasion is more likely to stimulate the other person's rebellious psychology, but it is more difficult to convince him.

In reality, people are emotional animals. If you smile at others, they will smile back at you. If you give someone frost, they will pay you back.

This is the general psychology of human beings and is also determined by human nature.

Persuasive chat is to make the other party accept our ideas willingly, not just nod in agreement.

In this way, you don't just talk and reason, but also need to "walk the heart"-knock on each other's hearts with feelings, understand and understand each other's inner world, and understand and understand each other's thoughts, ideas and needs.

In the process of dialogue, we should not only safeguard the dignity of the other party, but also satisfy the vanity of the other party, so as to be both "reasonable" and "happy" in the process of persuasion.

In a word, when people meet, it is inevitable that they will communicate, hear different ideas and see different attitudes.

When dealing with these situations, we should seriously consider a win-win solution, instead of turning the dialogue into a red-faced argument.