The Power of the Question: what most are missing

by Vernon Williams 37 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Vernon Williams

  To All

  I want to make a statement, and, if there is any interest, develope it a bit.

  In the interactions one has with a JW, no matter what level in the Org. or what the topic is, this needs to be remembered:

  Whomever controls the question controls all.

  The JWs are trained to control the result of the conversation through argument manipulation. The main tool in this regard is taking control of "the question." Most think they only need the "right" answer or present an overwhelming amount of evidence to prove thier point.

  Wrong.

  The JW will just continue to question until he finds a weak point and then open that until it is wedged open enough to allow an escape.

  Only, and, I mean ONLY if you control the question and never give it back to the JW is there a hope of making progress.

  Well, that is my basic premise.

  I have a difficult time, due to the "time-less-ness" of my present circumstance to follow threads in a progressive manner. I will do my best, if anyone is interested, to pursue this idea.

  Yours in this Journey,

  v
• 

  R.F.

  I agree. I must say as a JW I used this method quite extensively. JWs are trained to put themselves in control. If someone gains the upper hand by asking questions, a most JWs will quickly find a way to end the conversation.
• 

  Briguy

  This is sales 101 or anyone who has looked into it. Unfortunatly I did not realize this till later.
• 

  Vernon Williams

  We used this AS JWs but, do we use it in "sparing" with JWs. Most, from the result I have seen, do not.

  And, yes, it has a "sales" aspect...however, think about sales: what is the first rule on a question that is in opposition to your presentation: ignore it. Sales has to do with overcomming objections to purchasing whatever we are selling. Not question control as a specific goal.

  This abiltity to use the question: to control it, hold it, and learn what to do when we loose the control of the question is not a part of a normal human interaction. We must learn, if we are to gain a greater control of the outcome of a serious conversation with JWs the "Art of the Question."

  Until one does this he will never be effective in a discussion, an argument, or, my favorite, an outright intellectial brawl....man are those fun!

  Anyhow....

  Commments?

  V
• 

  Narkissos

  I think you are perfectly right as to the key role of questions in WT strategy.

  I for one would rather try to question JW questions than counter-question JW answers -- but that, too, means taking hold of the question at least once...
• 

  Vernon Williams

  Not once, constantly.

  The key is to end the conversation once the question is lost. Just stop.

  People can not do this. They feel compelled to "sum up."

  Interaction with the JWs is a chess game. Here's the deal: we already know "both sides of the board." We know the counter arguemts. The info. The History. The Bible. All of it. And, truth, the real, objective truth, is on our side. Yet, somehow, we "loose."

  What we are "loosing" is not the argument. We are loosing the ability to control the result.

  That is because we loose the question.

  It sounds to simple to be true.

  It is true. And, we must fight the programed nature of conversation...the give and take....the politeness of it all.....it does not work, here, in this debate with the Witnessess.

  We have to control the result by controlling the process.

  The key to that is maintaining control of thw question.

  V
• 

  Narkissos

  The key is to end the conversation once the question is lost. Just stop.

  Just what JWs do when they lose the "control of questions".

  People can not do this. They feel compelled to "sum up."

  Very true.

  Only we aren't fighting the same adversary.

  Yours is "JW mind control"

  Mine is "mind control" (even yours or mine potentially).

  Leading people out of JWs by corralling them into a compelling argument will not set them free. It's substituting one "master" to another.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Leading people out of JWs by corralling them into a compelling argument will not set them free. It's substituting one "master" to another.

  I agree Narkissos. But I think it is a trap all apostates fall into, not simply the ones with particularly off-putting counter-viewpoints and strategies.

  Since every statement is meaningless outside of narrative, the assertion "Jehovah's Witnesses do not have the truth" can only make sense within a wider structure. Apostates locate that statement within many different narratives: Christian, secular, hedonistic, materialistic, patriotic. I am not convinced enough by any. Apostates who make such statements are doing so inside such a structure of thought they have found useful for refuting their former beliefs. Therefore although I am not convinced that Jehovah's Witnesses have the truth any more, I cannot make a positive statement because I don't have a story to fit such a statement into. I could choose to utter something meaningless knowing that it makes sense to others, but I think it is better to keep quiet.

  Slim
• 

  Vernon Williams

  Narc,

  This idea of mine is not about controling someone's mind.

  It is about controlling the discussion by turning the Witness's greatest strength back on them. Defeending objective truth is not mind control.

  How is defending the date 586/7 as the fall of Jeruselem against 607 mind control?

  V
• 

  Narkissos

  Good points slim,

  Yet you don't keep quiet, do you? -- and I for one am sincerely grateful for that. Which raises the question again (as you expressed very well in another thread) whether the "no-narrative," or the "potential-infinity-of-narratives" options are not, paradoxically, narratives of their own, allowing for criticism of every particular "truth" from a "nowhere" or "everywhere" perspective.

  For the sake of honesty I would say my provisional narrative, fwiw, is a kind of "wanderer's novel". Each new step being made on a particular spot of "ground" which has to be forsaken for the next step. Yet all places remain "there" so to say. I can see why JWs are "wrong" from an orthodox Christian perspective, why orthodox Christianity is wrong from a historical perspective, why historicism is wrong from a mystical perspective, why mysticism is wrong from a scientific perspective, etc. What remains is the landscape, or the topography.

  Can't sympathetic ghosts who've "been there" be of some help to the living travellers along their ways, even though they don't share their desires and fears anymore?