How to Win Friends and Influence People Part 3, Chapter 1 Summary & Analysis

One evening, when Carnegie attended a banquet to honor a World War I hero, he was sitting next to a gentleman whose humorous story hinged on a famous quotation. He held that the quotation was from the Bible, but Carnegie corrected him, explaining that it was actually from Shakespeare. Later, on the way home, a colleague of Carnegie’s told him that he shouldn’t have corrected the man, because it just embarrassed him.

Here, Carnegie demonstrates that he, too, makes mistakes. In correcting this man, he was trying to bolster his own importance while embarrassing the other person. Carnegie’s own principles dictate that he should have done the opposite: remain humble and let this man maintain his dignity.

Active Themes

Carnegie spent his childhood arguing, but as he has grown up, he’s come to believe that there is only one way to win an argument—and that is to avoid it entirely. If you win an argument, you are still losing it, because the other person will be resentful and feel inferior. Carnegie also cites the maxim, “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”

Here, Carnegie illustrates why his argument with the man was futile, because opening the discussion by contradicting the man only incurred resentment. And, as the quotation suggestions, arguments don’t usually change a person’s opinion—therefore, it is best to avoid them.

Active Themes

One of Carnegie’s students, Patrick J. O’Haire, tried without success to sell trucks—he was too argumentative. But he changed tack: if someone told him that another company’s truck was the best, O’Haire agreed. But then, he moved on and gave the good points of his company’s truck. The other person couldn’t argue anymore, and they were able to move forward. Winning an argument is an empty victory because it never gets your opponent’s good will.

Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recus

Here, Carnegie introduces better strategies for having discussions. Rather than arguing points, O’Haire instead found common ground on which he and the other person could agree. By finding this basic agreement, O’Haire could then move past arguments and avoid incurring resentment.

Active Themes

Frederick S. Parsons, an income tax consultant, argued for an hour with a government tax inspector over $9,000 in taxes—Parsons claimed it was a bad debt that shouldn’t be taxed. But Parsons saw that the more he argued, the more stubborn the man became. So, he changed the subject and instead expressed appreciation for how well the man did his job. The man gradually became friendly, and three days later, he informed Parsons that he was going to leave the tax return as it was filed. Initially, the inspector got importance from asserting his authority—but as soon as he felt important, he became sympathetic.

Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error. Possimus cor

This example illustrates how arguments can be wrapped up in people’s desire for importance and appreciation. The tax inspector wanted to feel important, and so he tried to claim authority over Parsons. But as soon as Parsons switched from criticism to appreciation, the inspector also became much more positive in their interaction. Again, being friendly and providing others with a sense of importance are much more effective than trying to be argumentative and self-important.

Unlock Unlock with LitCharts A⁺

Active Themes

An article from Bits and Pieces makes some suggestions on how to keep a disagreement from becoming an argument. First, welcome the disagreement, as this allows people to correct mistakes. Next, watch out for defensiveness and control your temper. Listen first and look for areas of agreement; be honest and admit mistakes; and promise to think over opponents’ ideas and study them carefully. Thank your opponents for their willingness to disagree and have a discussion. Then, postpone action to give both sides time to think through a problem, so that people can consider if their opponents might be right. Yelling in arguments only cuts off communication and makes people argue even more.

Dolorem et quae. Exercitationem non aut. Eveniet dolor non. Incidunt dolores sunt. Ad dolor at. Quia aperiam eligendi. Ut veniam voluptatem. Aperiam consequuntur mollitia. Provident expedita delectus. Occaecati ea suscipit. Optio ut iste. Voluptas aut occaecati. Accusantium recusandae voluptates. Explicabo minus tempore. Nostrum dolor asperiores. Ut aliquam officiis. Unde enim nesciunt. Commodi necessitatibus voluptas. Accusamus eaque omnis. Velit eaque error.

Citing this article from a motivational magazine of the day, Carnegie suggests that there is a distinction between argument and disagreement. Argument cuts off communication and comes from a spirit of negativity. But when people simply disagree, they’re honestly listening to and respecting others’ ideas, avoiding negativity and resentment. As a result, the article suggests, people are much more likely to come to productive conclusions when they avoid arguments.

Unlock Unlock with LitCharts A⁺

Active Themes

How to Win Friends and Influence People: Part 3, Chapter 1 Summary & Analysis