YOU cannot win an argument!

Am I calling you stupid? Do I think that you are you too much of an idiot to get your point across? Is it my opinion that your capacity for articulation is too limited for another person to understand and agree with you?

No. I'm not saying any of those things. What I am saying is that you cannot win an argument, because there is no way to win once it becomes an argument. There's a saying about how arguing with people on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.

When someone tells you something and you tell them that they are wrong, especially in public, there is often no graceful way out. You lose no matter what you do. While you may be well armed with all of the facts and equipped to eloquently distribute the truth in such a way that all present are forced to accept what you say as correct and accurate, if you take this route, you make an enemy of the original speaker.

You may prove yourself right, but at the cost of any potential goodwill that person would ever have shown you. You have made them look like a complete idiot, in front of others no less. And on the off chance that they are able to poke holes in your otherwise impeccable logic, then you face the humiliation of calling them out and being wrong yourself. In one situation you create an enemy. In the other you lose both credibility and face. Neither can be considered a win.

That is not to say that you muse blithely accept whatever drivel spews forth from a person's mouth. There are ways of correcting a person that do not directly challenge their pride or even their ability to reason.

Chiefest among them is to never directly state that you are proving their statement or belief is false.  When you open your side of the discussion by saying to all present that you intend to prove that the other person is wrong it gets their defensive mechanisms going. The walls come up and any hope at logic and reason from them goes right out the window. You can then run out fact after fact for hours and they will resist every step of the way.

A far better way is to start out by admitting your own fallibility.  Phrases like, I think, it seems to me, it appears, or from my understanding, go a long way towards disarming the other person. They show your acceptance that you might be wrong. You are flexible and willing to go with whatever you happen to find out in your search for truth.By showing your own willingness, to be open to the possibility to be wrong, you automatically engender that same willingness in the other person.

Begin your dialogue by saying, you realize that you are not perfect and that you make mistakes. Admit that the other person may be right and you may be wrong. Then invite the other person to go through the facts with you together to see what is real and what is not.

At this point if the other person refuses, then it becomes obvious to all that the other person is far more interested in being "right" than in what is true. Your side does not matter because all they care about is their ego. At this point just agree with them and let the matter drop. This way you win because all present, including the person who refused to work with you on finding the facts, realize that you are right.

And if they do agree to explore all of the facts with you to uncover who is right and who is wrong, no matter how it turns out, you win then too. If the facts show that you are right the other person is willing to admit it, now that you are not forcing it down their throat. If they show that you are wrong, the matter has been resolved amicably and you have found a partner in discovering truth, rather than creating an enemy.

Do not argue. Persuade