What is a discussion?

It's no secret that the number of people and the number of points of view are approximately equal. However, a person is so arranged that he cannot come to terms with this fact, and is constantly looking for the most correct and reasoned opinion on any issue. In an ordinary dialogue it is almost impossible to achieve the goal, therefore a special type of communication comes to the rescue: discussion.

The traditional argument rarely turns out to be at least a little productive - as a rule, the reason for this is increased emotionality, biased arguments of the parties and the “momentary” verbal battles, because in everyday speech they arise unpredictably. The discussion, on the contrary, is exactly the opposite and puts the argumentation, seriousness and intelligence of the participants in the dialogue at the forefront. Formally, there are three types of “reasoned communication” that pursue completely different goals and imply different ways of arguing. Apodictic discussion follows the principle of "truth is born in controversy." Participants are not tuned to "war" with each other, on the contrary - they are going to find the most correct answer to the question. The direct opposite of this approach is ericism, which is a “dispute for the sake of argument”, and is an attempt to convince the opponent of the correctness of his own opinion. There is also a sophisticated type of discussion: the sophist aims not so much to convince his opponent as to suppress his eloquence, confuse, manipulate and in general - by any means be higher than the opponent. Discussion is not everyday conversation. Canonically, this is the whole event: the topic is agreed in advance; a list of parties is drawn up; the final goal to be achieved is determined. In fact, any meeting of politicians, a weekly “planning meeting” at work or a thematic round table can be attributed to this type of meeting. There is even such a form of leisure as “discussion clubs”. Structurally, they are a society of people that gathers on certain dates to discuss any issues (variably: watching and discussing movies, news, political events). At such meetings, an additional role of the “leader” appears - the neutral side, called upon to control the course of the dispute, to calm the heated participants and, on the contrary, to involve the most modest of them in the conversation.