If You Have These Habits, You’re Accidentally Making People Dislike You

Spread the love

recently stephen crowder and ethan klein got together to discuss the pros and cons of listening to the cdc somehow that conversation turned into this ethan how can you respect yourself as a man brother something so strongly that you’re not willing to talk about showing your little right right hey ethan ethan come on yikes so in today’s video we’re going to break down how that conversation got so heated and what you can learn from it specifically we’ll go over five common habits you may have that are making friends dislike you when you argue we’ll also go over some positive ways you can be more persuasive and make people like you even during a disagreement as always this is not a criticism of stephen or ethan as people it’s just a teachable moment to help you in arguments you may have in the future okay so how did things get to that point the conversation actually starts out surprisingly cordial hey ethan how you doing brother hey i just want to say on a serious note that i’m glad you’re um your wife is okay i heard you had a little bit of a yeah with dear wife well she’s uh she’s pregnant with twins so yeah it’s like uh well by the way congratulations too i know you guys are thank you in the same process it’s only after steven launches into his first question about trusting the cdc that things go south check it out i think people should think about it i believe and we talked about this through playful ribbing in an aggregation of medical authorities and scientific voices to make an informed and rational decision um so where do you think that i was that i’m wrong on that ethan’s response doesn’t really make sense without context so here’s some quick background for you steven has a sponsorship with spartan armor systems ethan’s opinion of stephen is that he dislikes gay people and is ducking a debate with a guy named sam cedar now given that info watch how ethan responds to that question about the cdc stephen do you know that um the spartans are that they are like uh practice man love with children oh jeez okay so this is what’s going to happen i told what did i tell you he was gonna do anything he could to avoid oh oh there he is oh no sam cedar what a whoa what a [ __ ] nightmare the mistake ethan makes here if you care to persuade the person you’re talking with is aiming for a gotcha moment ha gotcha you have got me you have got me gotcha moments are attempts to make someone look stupid when you try to make someone look stupid you’re no longer working together to examine the truth of a claim instead you make the argument a game of social dominance watch ethan and sam’s reaction once the conversation with stephen ends do you get the sense that their goal was to explore whether or not listening to the cdc makes sense or do you get the sense that this was about social dominance we got him then he watched the show we got him dude we played them so hard they’re celebrating but as you’ll see in a minute the conversation was very unproductive no one learned anything new no one changed their mind no audience members are better informed about the cdc in your own life it will be very tempting when discussing something in front of other people to go for gotcha moments or make the other person look stupid this feeds your ego in the moment because it makes you feel superior but it doesn’t make friends or change anyone’s mind that’s why the socratic method is so powerful rather than try to convince someone of something you respectfully guide them with questions and let them convince themselves the difference between a gotcha question and a respectful question comes through in tone and pacing you want a slow cadence and a non-aggressive tone with genuine upward inflection here’s a good example with trevor noah after the 2016 election now i would like to know from your side genuinely as someone who’s won do you believe that donald trump will follow through on his promises getting back to learning from steven and ethan stephen actually had a great opportunity here he could have called out ethan and sam for bringing sam without telling him ahead of time but then done the debate anyway despite feeling lied to if his argument holds up under scrutiny he comes off great and gets to educate all three of their audiences instead we quickly see the next two common mistakes people make in arguments i don’t know if this was the case with steven but these two mistakes in particular come out in most people when their emotions get the best of them the first is incredibly common it’s to repeatedly talk over someone okay it’s about issues it’s about issues yeah those issues that’s what you’re doing here some valid points you’re so clever i have no idea talking over someone once may just be a sign you’re excited to make your point but if you find yourself talking over someone repeatedly it can be a sign that you’re emotionally triggered because you’re unwilling to allow the other person to finish their point here’s another example sam why do you feel that anyone owes you air time when you have a 40th of the audience and you’ve been doing the show for ten times as long time i think i think that ethan has just given it to me right i didn’t ask him for it right no you’ve been begging for it for a long time with everyone bigger than yourself yeah he’s found he can’t build an audience when you feel the urge to cut someone off or if you feel your heartbeat escalate or your breathing get shallow and rushed pause and take one deep breath it sounds cliche but your nervous system has put you into fight or flight you need to calm it down so you can respond rationally rather than emotionally if not you’re very likely to make the next common mistake an ad hominem attack an ad hominem is an argument directed against a person rather than their position in the argument so in this case it would be anything unrelated to the cdc here’s a quick example h3 h3 and you’re wearing the whole we agreed so hold on a second yeah this is extremely common and often a sign of fear people turn to ad hominem when they’re afraid they’ll lose the actual argument the worst form of this is straight up insults that’s what you’re doing here some valid points you’re so clever i had no idea that you were taking your show off early last time coming in today with your pig pen peanuts i wish you take those off for the velveteen buttons the plan was to talk about the cdc and now we’re talking about his eyes this may work when you’re in front of an audience that already likes you but it will make the person you’re arguing with hate you it’s also likely to lead to them resorting to ad hominem attacks as well eventually you just get arguments like this next clip that are awful to be a part of how about you get to a 30th of the audience [Music] nothing productive can happen with this much hostility contrast that with how russell brand begins this disagreement with bill maher hillary clinton would not be pulling out of the iran deal or the paris climate deal or it’s really you know i respect you and i admire you very much and i think you’re a courageous man one of the problems i have in instances such as this this is far more persuasive a genuine compliment before you disagree opens someone up to be receptive to ideas they didn’t hold previously here’s another example of russell speaking with ben shapiro one of the things that like that i admire about you is your deafness and ability to handle confrontational conversations when it comes to the disagreement itself the ideal way to be persuasive in an argument is the exact opposite of an ad hominem attack rather than attacking their character separate the person you’re talking to from their viewpoint this gives them the chance to change their mind without feeling their identity is under attack here’s a great example from jordan peterson the problem i have with your argument and this isn’t i don’t mean that you’re wrong i i see what you’re doing and i see why you’re doing it and it’s as far as i can tell it’s laudable did you notice how he says the problem i have with your argument and not the problem i have with you you can take this one step further by saying that argument instead of your argument here’s a similar example from russell brand and ben shapiro you know when i hear you criticize power i agree with you sometimes when i hear you criticize what in my view are people that are less powerful this is where i find myself not in alignment with your perspective i i say this with respect no this is a really important idea and i want to get into it russell does two good things in the span of 15 seconds first he highlights where he agrees with ben then he keeps ben’s ego unthreatened by saying he disagrees with his perspective rather than him again even better would be that perspective by using phrases like that argument or that perspective you separate the position from the person the rule to remember is this if you want someone to be receptive to new ideas you need to keep their ego feeling unthreatened this next common mistake is an obvious one so we’ll cover it quickly but it’s important to note because people will hate you when you do it to them straw manning here’s a quick example with sam harris and ben affleck first watch sam lay out his point the crucial point of confusion is that that we have been sold this meme of islamophobia where every criticism of the doctrine of islam gets conflated with bigotry toward muslims as people now watch ben affleck completely mischaracterize that point just a few seconds later you’re saying that islamophobia is not a real thing if you want to persuade the person you’re speaking with and make them like you more do the exact opposite of this ask yourself what is the most intelligent charitable way i can make their point for them then reiterate that point back confirming they feel it accurately represents their point of view before you argue against it ultimately all of these points come down to one dangerous yet common habit most people have when disagreeing with someone they’re unwilling to consider that they may in fact be on the wrong side you want to trade your i want to win mindset for an i want to learn if i’m wrong mindset immediately you’ll find you don’t do any of these bad habits because you’ll interpret arguments as opportunities to test ideas and see which one stands up best under scrutiny your goal is no longer to show you were right coming into the discussion it’s to leave believing something that’s true and there’s an added persuasive benefit to this mindset by not positioning the person who came in with the right idea as the winner you allow people to change their minds without feeling like they lost persuasion happens when people feel like they’re both on the same team in search of finding the truth together not that he’s perfect but this is the mindset that allows russell to have multiple incredibly cordial conversations with ben shapiro despite their political differences he describes it well here you know but i’m in a sort of an open space where i feel that what i want to do is understand you and be giving giving to you and generous to you even though as we have both listed and are both surely aware there are loads of stuff that i’m we would disagree on okay so what do you do if you do accidentally get into a social dominance game it’s happened to all of us you went in trying to have a thoughtful discussion but it devolved into an argument that went nowhere you probably walked away frustrated thinking the other person is an idiot now what it’s time for projection reflection this is something the average person struggles with but it’s also one of the greatest levers of personal development and self-improvement first sit down and write out all your criticisms of the person you just argued with maybe they were stubborn or rude or shouted over you then reflect on the ways that you were guilty of the same behavior for example remember that ethan agreed to debate stephen and then tagged out without mentioning it beforehand you may see some irony in what he says to stephen after steven won’t debate sam cedar stevenson you’re such a coward stop showing your little leprechaun co-host who comes out dressed like your sidekick similarly calls ethan a coward for not debating him while denying to debate sam so if you find yourself complaining about the other side pause and reflect on if this critique really only describes the other side often the things that aggravate us the most about other people are the things we don’t like about ourselves that we are pretending aren’t there here’s one more quick example with steven and ethan do you want to respond to anything he said now that he’s not talking over you it’s easy to criticize and demonize the other side what’s harder is to recognize that you may be guilty of similar behavior one of the best things you can do for your personal growth and happiness is take your critiques of other people and use them to investigate if there’s an area in yourself you’d benefit from changing there’s one last weird psychology observation from all this drama that’s worth touching on fans from both sides watch the same video and each is wholly convinced that their guy came away looking great and the other guy looks like an idiot how can they come away with such different impressions from the same video if you ever find yourself in a position where you and someone else watch the same video or read the same article but come away with strong yet opposite opinions it’s a good potential warning side that your view may be compromised by pre-existing bias or tribalism just something to be aware of in yourself if you want to learn more about how to argue while actually being likable and persuasive you should check out how to and friends and influence people by dale carnegie it is easily one of the best resources ever created for charisma dale gives great actionable advice for a variety of social and professional situations and you can get the audio book for free today thanks to our sponsor for this video audible if you want to check it out go to audible.com charisma or text charisma to 500 500. audible is my favorite audiobook platform it’s a great way to take down time like driving or doing errands and transform it into productive time where you’re learning and improving yourself by joining audible you get a credit every month to use on any title in their premium selection regardless of price you also get access to their plus catalog with thousands of audiobooks podcasts and guided meditations that you can listen to for free with your membership again if you want to try it out you can go to audible.com charisma or text charisma to 500 500 and get a free 30-day trial including any audiobook you want i recommend how to win friends and influence people either way i hope you like this video i want to thank our video editing team of andre therese and ivan for working so hard to edit it thank you so much for watching it and hopefully we’ll see you in the next one [Music] you



Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Whole point was that Coldfeet Crowder does not have real debates with other people. So it was not so much a "gotcha" moment. It could of been an opportunity for him to shoe read debate skills. But instead he ran away.

  2. lol this video is so weird. ethan said the spartan thing as a cue for dan to patch sam seder in. weird for you to pick on that as a 'gotcha' moment. it didn't mean anything more than a code word.

  3. 3:45 I honestly think none of these three participants especially Crowder and Ethan actually came prepared with any real arguments, Seder was a wildcard. So this would have been essentially impossible. Crowder felt threatened and simply wasn't confident in his rhetoric up against 2 opponents, so declined to fight in an effort to save face. Of course in hindsight this backfired, but I think he ran the assessment of risk in his head and thought engaging AND LOSING would be MORE costly than running away. So he then did. Had crowder been confident in his arguments he would have engaged, but since he wasn't; I seriously doubt he had any, at least effective ones. It was 90% rhetoric with 10% arguments, if you understand what i'm saying.

  4. I think you perhaps used the wrong type of clip to demonstrate this concept, because at least to me. It was obvious that these performantive internet debates are rarely ever debates and more like performative rhetoric of social dominance over ideological opponents as part of a wider "culture war". When Ethan+Sam v. Crowder "debate" here, there was never going to be a debate even if Ethan approached it in good faith. and Nor would it be really appreciated by Crowder's or Ethan's receptive audiences. They are not there for intellectual rigor, or will critically consider arguments from opposing sides. They are there for "internet bloodsports" where two people will relentlessly bully each other and humiliate the other to come out on top. Crowder himself does this, all the time. It's his signature move on "Change my mind" a format where Crowder literally never changed his mind nor ever will. Since that's not the point. Had either side tried to actually engage in intellectual debate, this side would have been humiliated and instantly lose face. Not that this implies Crowder had "good faith" because he lost, just that he tactically got out manuevered in this silly game they're doing. These are just my two cents.

  5. Coward Crowder is a lying bigoted fascist.
    Sam Seder is not “some guy”. He is a broadcaster for 15+ yrs. & is host of the Majority Report.
    Don’t give Crowder any credibility.

  6. 9:17 “Your goal is not to prove you were right coming into the discussion, but to leave believing something that is true.”
    This is an amazingly game-changing way of framing why we should be open-minded in our discussions with those with whom we disagree. Kudos!

  7. I get where you are critiquing Crowder after Seder came on, they would be legitimately crtiques in a normal debate. However, the debate ended once H3 pulled what he did by shoe horning Seder into the feed.

  8. I don't really think changing steven's mind was the goal from the onset. as someone who has had these arguments over and over again and applying methods that would make the conversation more thought provoking and cordial, I've come to realize that conversation is always a two way street, and humans do have their emotional limits before setting up barriers and coming to the conclusion "what's the point? it's not like they'll listen anyway" by then the goal is to hurt the other person in order to either get them to back off (make it so uncomfortable for them that they don't even want to entertain future conversations with you, or hurt them for cathartic reasons. both revolve around a lack or loss of hope around the conversation.

  9. It's not helpful that Ethan Klien has repeatedly shown himself to be pond scum. The worst example being his wishing Ben Shapiro his wife and children be the first in the gas chamber in the next Holocaust. He wished plenty of people dead during COVID.

  10. I felt just a little bad for Steven because he spent like a week talking to Ethan on Twitter to get this debate going and it was like a back and forth with Ethan he kept changing what was going to happen but besides that I agree if it was me I would not have just left I would have stayed would have had a face that could kill a guy but I would have stayed though but the true irony of it all Ethan told Steven on Twitter that it was a one on one just Ethan's team and Stevens team that was what he wanted than just straight up lies to him to get a mild a very mild boost in popularity that faded away faster than it came

  11. So this was supposed to be two men speaking, Crowder predicted that Ethan would bring someone else in to debate for him. Sam wasn't seen or brought up until the first question was asked, the debate wasn't between Sam and Steven the debate was between Ethan and Steven. Lol

  12. The one chubby beta secretly invites the other skinny beta on the show without approval as a " gotcha!" Crowder responded brilliantly! And remember, he's a comedian by trade. Of course he's going to roast the guy with the Peanuts glasses.

  13. the problem I have with your argument regarding ad hominem attacks is that literal white supremacist nazis kind of deserve them and trying to have a civilized debate with someone like Steven crowder or Jordan Peterson (a person who believes lobsters and humans are basically the same because serotonin makes lobsters angry so that means heirarchys must exist) is a waste of time and likely counter productive

  14. I think this video is missing context that Steven Crowder is never looking to change his mind on topics, or learn anything. Of course this is about social dominance. Where have you been during Trumps presidency while all this right wing propaganda and “winning” bs was socially dominating any real learning and real debates, changing minds, and finding truth. Did anyone want truth? No, they just wanted to say “winning” and say trump 2020 so now you get it right back and someone doesn’t like it.

  15. did you watch the same video or are we just cherry picking clips here? look obviously ethan is a little tricky weasel here but he’s not a debater. The ENTIRE time it was sam constantly trying to start a debate while steven was just attacking his success, his show, his appearance and whatnot. Steven is constantly talking over him and interrupting him. You can’t accuse sam of not looking for a productive discussion when he’s constantly calling for one while steven is just interrupting and going ad hom. Obviously ethan’s not being serious at all because he’s a comedian himself. he’s not a debater. Once Steven initiates the personal attacks and the interruptions of course h3h3, a comedic youtuber, is gonna start insulting him.

    I swear you MUST be watching a different video.

  16. you're making the assumption that Crowder argues in good faith there is notrail of evidence to support this assumption he's a bottom feeder right wing liar who deserves to be shunned with full force

  17. 🤣 What in the hell of a hole is this channel!
    Cold feet crowder refused to engage in the debate on the topic despite Sam repeatedly, politely asking him but Cowarder kept speaking over Sam. Sam & Ethen stopped speaking everytime Cowarder asked them to give him a moment to make a point. But be refused to reciprocate it and at last hung up on Sam despite while insulting him.

    So your clever "clipping" of the whole thing to make Cowarder look good after that disaster is hilariously pathetic.

  18. Crowder's reasoning for not debating Sam in that scenario is because Sam has gaslit his audience to believe that SC is a coward and has ducked out of debates over and over again, and Ethan doesn't get to just bring someone on that wasn't invited to the conversation to take his place without the consent of the other party when it completely goes against the original agreement they had. Setting the prescedent of allowing people to insult you and demand debates from them is not looking for an honest conversation. Now I can agree that Crowder is a hypocrite and has done this to other people but I believe the philosophy is sound. People don't have the right to my time for any reason and insulting me then demanding I engage with them in a bad faith way is terrible. There's a diff between critiquing someone honestly and dunking on them dishonestly

  19. Steven Crowder is not an honest actor and he's not open to a real debate with equals and this is proof. He's not upset because it's a gotcha moment (of his own creation). He's upset because he won't be able to railroad a debate with factless assertions against a well-informed opponent such as Sam Seder. This is a terrible example. The gotcha moment only exists because Steven would never allow the debate to happen.

  20. I think Jordan Peterson said "gotcha" as a joke, to poke fun at Kathy Newman for ACTUALLY trying to set him up for a "gotcha," but then he got it instead, which was funny. It gave her a chance to stop bullying him while giving her a chance to save face at the same time. It was a really smart move, especially for such a heated discussion. Unfortunately, I don't think she understood that.

  21. Crowder just didn‘t want to debate Seder because he knew how brutally Seder would make him look like the fool that he is. Crowder is actively ducking Seder because it would never suit sustaining his position, but it getting destroyed. Crowder is not interested at all in learning if he is wrong! Hell, he would rather kill the whole human kind than changing his mind…

  22. Watching this ‘conversation’ if I didn’t know where they started I wouldn’t have known what they were supposed to be talking about. Maybe they need a moderator
    I never appreciated how well Russell Brand handles arguments.

  23. Never liked the seem of Ethan. Can't believe it was him who did all those classic exe. memes because the guy is duller than dirt and always seemed seedy and unlikable from his content.

  24. 8:57 Unfortunately, no one will ever shift away from the "I want to win" mindset as people are too personally invested in the side they're on or the ideology they've adopted.

  25. I disagree with you, you say that he should have done the debate but h3h3 clearly disrespected the terms of coming onto another persons show and therefore lost the right to be on said show. I wouldn’t debate someone who tries to force their way into my show or life