How to be a good interlocutor
There is a difference in communication between people between debate, debate and debate. The debate occurs when the speakers have the same idea, where they speak to increase their information about themselves and more in themselves, while the dialogue between two or more people around a particular idea is that they speak to reach the right And the right, using methods of discussion and scientific research and mental trials and evidence and evidence and so on, but the debate between different people around a certain idea that they possess convictions firmly in their minds and have no intention to change these convictions they have, Z hatred and hatred sometimes, especially when Almottagadlon is polite or do not know the modern origins.
Dialogue is an attempt to reach the truth, which concerns a large number of people, so dialogue is art of the arts, the more axioms of the fundamentals of dialogue, the better the dialogue to meet its goal. This is why there are a number of things that must be done by each of the parties to the dialogue so that they succeed in this dialogue and achieve its objectives.
All parties to the dialogue must come before it and begin to think that they are seeking truth and truth, and to view dialogue as a collective reflection with a loud voice and to remove any nervousness or special interest in dialogue. Is possible so that the party to whom the argument is made changes after the end of this dialogue and is convinced of the truth. Hence, the dialogue has achieved its main objective of clarifying the truth and its statement.
One of the most important things that make a good interlocutor is to be confident during the conversation, arranged for his ideas before starting dialogue, this would accelerate the transfer of ideas between the interlocutors and not to be embarrassed, in addition to each of the parties to the dialogue to give a full opportunity He also has to keep away from emotions and try as much as possible to stick to the scientific method of dialogue. Emotional speech during scientific dialogues gives the impression of the person that he is not able to say what he says. And if what he says is the voice B, the scientific evidence arbitrator is the best defender of the idea.
By Mohamed Marwan