Lacrosse Dodges – Instructions – Beginner Lacrosse
List of Lacrosse Dodges
This page provides instructions for wide variety of lacrosse dodges such as a split dodge, face dodge and even the question mark dodge. You will find free videos and instructions for basic lacrosse dodges as well as more advanced dodges (i.e. the toe drag dodge).
These lacrosse dodges help players to get open for a shot, to make a feed to a teammate or to receive a pass. Fast middies should be good at dodges such as the split dodge and face dodge. A large strong offensive players should practice lacrosse dodges such as the bull dodge and inside roll. Quick & agile attackmen should work on change of direction dodges and Z dodges. Even lacrosse defenders should practice their dodging skills in order to enhance their clearing skills and to avoid an opponent’s rides.
Beginner Lacrosse – Best Lacrosse Books
Basic Lacrosse Dodges – Click on the individual dodges for video and/or written instructions.
- Bull Dodge – The bull dodge is a useful technique if you are bigger and stronger than your opponent. This dodge basically involves powering through or running over your opponent.
- Face Dodge – A face dodge allows you to protect the ball on the run without slowing down.
- Roll Dodge – With a roll dodge, you spin while on the move in order to protect the ball with your back.
- Split Dodge – With a split dodge, you switch hands on the run in order to protect the ball.
Intermediate & Advanced Lacrosse Dodges – Click on the individual dodges for video and/or written instructions.
Instructional Video for Basic Lacrosse Dodges
The Top 5 Best Lacrosse Dodges – LaxWeekly
Hey everyone it’s Jake with Lax Weekly! Today we’re going to go over the top 5 BEST dodges in lacrosse.
These dodges are the most important to learn and the most effective!
Whether you’re a beginner or a college lacrosse player, these are 5 moves that
In this article, I’ll go over each dodge, why it’s effective, when to use it, and what types of players would find it the most useful.
If you’re new to the sport, I’d highly recommend
Before we get started, would you mind if I sent you an email each week with film breakdowns and drills to become a better lacrosse player?
If the answer is yes, please go join the Lax Weekly email newsletter! Many of you have already subscribed to it recently which is incredible. My goal is to help all of you become great at this sport that I love so much.
#1: The Split Dodge
Instead of counting down, we’re going to start with #1. And the #1 dodge in lacrosse that you should all know how to do is the
If you’ve been playing lacrosse for any amount of time, chances are you’ve at least heard of the split dodge. It’s where you switch the stick from one hand to the other and change directions. It’s very similar to a crossover in basketball where you dribble the ball from one hand to the other and change direction.
There are many variations of the split dodge, and my favorite one is the three step split dodge. It’s where you take one step in the direction you want to go, one step in the opposite direction and then explode back to the direction you want to go. I’ll explain how to do this in more detail in a future article.
The split dodge is a great dodge to use when you have lots of space. You’ll notice a lot of midfielders using this dodge from up top when they have lots of space and room to run at their defenders.
Every lacrosse player can use the split dodge, but
The only knock I have on the split dodge is that you bring the stick in front of you, which means your stick is vulnerable and a defenseman has the opportunity to check the ball out of your stick. But that’s a nice segue into the second most important dodge you should know how to do, the roll dodge.
#2: The Roll Dodge
The roll dodge is another fundamental move that every lacrosse player, regardless of their position should know how to do. It’s similar to the split dodge in that many times you’re switching hands and changing direction, but this time you’re turning your back to your defender and rolling instead of facing him directly.
There are also many variations of the roll dodge, and my personal favorite is the inside roll. This is where you take your defender up the field and roll underneath him to get your hands free for a goal. Usually you keep the ball in your same hand as opposed to switching it. It’s nearly impossible to stop if you do it in the right situation, and it’s a common move used by attackman at all levels of lacrosse.
Just like the split dodge, everyone can use this move, but the guys who are really strong or big might find this move especially useful, since you can really use your leverage to get past your defender. In addition, really short attackman will find this dodge useful, as you can almost slip underneath your defender by rolling around him.
The roll dodge is usually done with less space and can actually be the most effective when your defender is draped all over you.
The great part about the roll dodge is that your stick is protected the entire time, which means that defenders will have a harder time getting the ball away from you. My only knock with this dodge is that your back is turned to your defender while you’re doing the move, which means you could get double teamed without you noticing. That’s why it’s always important to keep your head up when you’re dodging and try to anticipate when a slide might be coming.
#3: The Face Dodge
For #3 we have the face dodge, another great move for all lacrosse players.
The face dodge is probably the simplest dodge on this list. When your defender is running at you, you bring the stick in front of your face and keep it in your same hand.
The best time to use the face dodge is when a defender takes a bad approach at you. You can quickly face dodge around them and score. This dodge should primarily be used when you’re off ball and you catch a ball and your defender runs at you. It would take too much time to switch hands so keeping it in the same hand is effective.
Outside shooters will find this move effective, as they usually work more off-ball than players who dodge. A lot of Canadians use this move because they’re known for only using their dominant hand instead of switching to their non-dominant hand. This move is also great in fast breaks when you quickly need to get around a defender.
So the split dodge, roll dodge and the face dodge are, at least in my opinion, the three foundational dodges in lacrosse. Pretty much other dodge is a combination or variation of these three dodges. And this is another great segue into my fourth dodge which is the re-dodge.
#4: The Re-Dodge
This is when you dodge once and maybe your defender stops you, so you get some space and dodge again, you re-dodge.
As you play higher and higher levels of lacrosse, it’s going to be difficult to get around your defender in one try, but the re-dodge can be effective at giving you another chance at scoring. A lot of times defenders are ready to slide to you when you first dodge, but if you re-dodge, the defenders are thrown off guard and don’t slide. I actually just made a film breakdown of a re-dodge that you can go watch now.
A perfect example of a lacrosse re-dodge!
#5: The Question Mark Dodge
Finally at number 5 we have the question mark dodge, which is one of my favorite dodges in all of lacrosse. This is where you drive up towards the island which is around 5 yards up and 5 yards to the side of the goal, and then you turn around and shoot.
I’d compare this move to a step back in basketball – it’s a pretty difficult shot to do, but if you can do it right, it’s almost impossible to stop because the defender can’t get to your hands. The attackman who really made the question mark a go-to move is Rob Pannell, and I’d recommend that you watch some of his film.
The question mark is a great move if you favor your dominant hand. If your defender knows you favor your dominant hand, they’ll probably try to push you to your non-dominant hand. Great, well you can drive up to the island with your non-dominant hand, and turn around and shoot with your dominant hand. Voila.
If you want to see even more great dodges, you should join the Lax Weekly email newsletter where I send out the latest techniques and moves for offensive lacrosse players looking to get better. More than 300 people already have.
Those were the top 5 dodges in lacrosse for every offensive player to learn and master. If you have any questions or feedback, you’re always welcome to leave a comment and I will make sure to get back to you quickly.
Have an awesome day, I’ll see you next time.
Lacrosse Goalie’s Quick Guide to Dodging
After a goalie makes a save, his or her team is now on offense.
If you’ve read my post on leading the clear, you’d know how to go through your progressions for an outlet pass.
But in the event a goalie has no open outlets he/she will exit the crease and may find themselves carrying the ball up the field.
Here’s a quick primer on the different dodges for goalies to practice so we can leave riding attackman in our dust.
The Face Dodge
The face dodge was my bread and butter move when it came to juking attackman.
It works so well for 2 reasons:
- The majority of riding attackman don’t play solid defense. They just try to make a hero check.
- The goalie stick is so large, attackman get drawn to it like a red cape for a bull
Pull the stick back as if you’re going to make a pass, then pull it in front of your face and watch the opposing attackman look like a fool as he tries to check a goalie stick that’s no longer there. Then you continue the clear up the field north/south.
Here is Kyle Harrison explaining how to execute the face dodge:
The split dodge is very similar to the face dodge except in the split dodge after pulling the stick in front of our face we switch hands. Since most goalies don’t have a strong off-hand I recommend you stick with the face dodge.
The toe drag is also similar to the face dodge except in the toe drag we cross our stick low in front of the defender. Instead of crossing the stick face level you crosse it toe level. If you’ve wound up to throw a sidearm pass and the riding attackman comes at you high, it’s a great opportunity to toe drag.
Here’s a toe drag in action from Syracuse goalie Asa Goldstock so you know what I’m referring to:
Another toe drag:
The Bull Dodge
The Bull Dodge is all about size and power. Nothing fancy to it, you simply lower your shoulder and run the riding attackman over.
A popular offensive move for bigger, stronger lacrosse goalies going up against a small attackman.
Goalies can perform the bull dodge with one hand on the stick or both hands on the stick. This move is pure force and power.
In the bull dodge, goalies should make sure not to push off with their free arm, because this is a penalty and will result in a turnover.
If you’re a small goalie like me, don’t try the bull dodge. This move is for larger goalies with mass.
In the video above the goalie also performs a “hot pizza” technique where he carries the ball out in front of his body with a one hand. This is a great move to avoid getting checked from behind.
Here’s another classic bull dodge from Army’s David Symmes for your viewing pleasure:
The Roll Dodge
The roll dodge requires strong weak-hand stick skills which goalies typically don’t have.
But if you’re a goalie who’s spent time developing their ball carrying skills with their weak hand then feel free to include this dodge in your arsenal.
The roll dodges can leave slower riding attackman in the dust. In this dodge, a goalie starts in one direction then pivots backwards in the other direction with their back to the riding attackman.
If done right, the goalie player rolls off the attackman and moves upfield north/south.
Here’s a video explaining the roll dodge:
Side note: Nice save at 1:13 in that video, huh?
When Not To Dodge
As a goalie our responsibility is to clear the ball and get it into the hands of our offense so they can do their thing.
Therefore, we should never attempt risky dodges where we could lose possession of the ball and even worse, give up an empty net goal.
I recommend goalies only dodge when we’re forced to. We’re not looking to take on riding attackman via a dodge.
But if everyone is covered and there’s no open outlet and a riding attackman on the goalie, then one of these dodges could come in handy.
In every case, I always recommend goalies pull away into open space and deliver a crisp pass to a teammate versus trying to take on a riding attackman via a dodge.
Dodging Requires Stick Skills
As a goalie you should have some of the best stick skills on the team.
If that statement doesn’t define you then add wall ball into your training sessions until it does.
Strong stick skills will help you out in all of the dodges I’ve described above. In addition, great stick skills directly translate into move saves from strong hand eye coordination.
Our primary responsibility is to stop the ball but that doesn’t mean goalies can’t learn a few dodges to make riding attackman look like fools.
When it comes to dodges for goalies there’s really just 3 options: the face dodge, the bull dodge, and the roll dodge. If you’re a smaller goalie, don’t try the bull dodge. If you have bad off-hand stick skills avoid the roll dodge.
Better yet, be careful with dodging as a goalie and really only attempt a dodge when there’s no other alternative.
Of course you could always be like Blaze:
Until next time! Coach Damon
Any other different types of dodges that you goalies do? Let me know about it in the comments.
Main photo by Travis Warren.
Fundamentals of Dodging – LAXPlaybook
So much of lacrosse is based around finding a good match up. If your players can not dodge or defend the dodge you will not have any good match ups there by drastically limiting your options. Every practice should incorporate dodging in some way. However that does not mean it has to be just guys taking turns going one on one.
There are many different types of dodges, all can work if done properly. As the game evolves and creativity explodes more great dodges are formed. We will take a look at a few basic dodges:
The roll dodge is one of the most effective dodges especially in tight. This move is also very commonly taught in basketball. If the lacrosse stick is in the left hand you would want to plant your right foot into the defender, turn away from the defender and as your back is to the defender put your lacrosse stick in your right hand then burst out of the dodge. The goal is to get the defender to over commit and get off balance before you roll. you also have to be very close or touching the defender to make the roll really effective.
In the face dodge you draw the defender to you with a fake shot or pass, and then quickly bring the stick across your own face to avoid the defender and then accelerate toward him to set up a pass or shot shot once you get by him. With the face dodge you are just moving your stick from a shooting or passing position quickly across the front of your face to the opposite side tucking it close to your ear. When you have the ball as a defender comes out to play you, you fake a shot and then go from a shot/pass position to protect the stick with your head and body, and you explode past the Defender to an opening for a shot on goal, or a pass to a teammate.
Split dodge is like the Face dodge in that it is a straight ahead dodge (no roll). This time instead of trying to fake the defender into thinking you are going to shoot, you are going to make him think you are trying to blow by him on one side, but instead quick plant your lead foot and switch directions. You change your stickside hands in front of your face, and then blow by on the other side of the defender. You are getting the defender off balance with the fast change of direction and stick hands, and protecting the stick near your opposite ear as you scoot by on the other side.
The Bull dodge won by running through the defender, the defender stick or there checks. You want to get close to your opponent, and run through him keeping the ball to the free hand side, away from the defender. The bull dodge is a great dodge to take advantage of a defender who is not in there proper stance and positioning. Make sure you are at full speed when you try a bull dodge. You have to be very careful with this dodge of being called for a ward. Very often upon contact the dodger will use that free hand to push off the defender. I have seen many times a successful bull dodge be called for a ward because the defender gets knocked far back and the ref assumes that the dodger used the free hand to push off. A simple solution can be to put two hands on the stick.
Top 5 Dodges for Midfielders
Playing as a midfielder in a game of Lacrosse requires the player to have skills such as endurance and speed. These skills are required because a midfielder plays the role of both offense and defense player and the transition between these two roles occurs rather swiftly. Therefore, besides agility, it is important for midfielders to hone their game using some techniques.
Listed below are the five types of dodges that midfielders can deploy to improve their game.
Top 5 Dodges for Midfielders
The Wing Dodge
Wing dodge is another technique that every midfielder must know and practice. The move involves having the defender chase you to the wing side of the goal and pull a dodge to score. A classic example of the wing dodge is known as face dodge. The offense player brings the stick near to his or her face and then swiftly dodges from under the defender. Often used by the Canadian players, the primary advantage of wing dodge is that, at all times, it allows the use of the dominant hand. Most players who are swift but short in height can immensely benefit from wing dodge.
Split Dodge, RollBack
Often the most frequently deployed and unstoppable dodge, the technique helps in scoring the goal easily. Assuming that the player is a right-handed one, the technique involves the player to split dodge to his left. The defender tries to stop the dodge, and the player springs a surprise by rolling back and scoring the goal. Often it happens that at the time of executing the goal, the player is blocked out of goal keeper’s view by the defender’s position, and scoring the goal is an almost certain event.
The technique is so popular because of its high scoring ability that it is almost always taught to every midfielder irrespective of his or her built and style of play.
The Swim Move
A move made popular by Paul Rabil, one of the best Lacrosse players, it involves bringing your stick over your defender in a motion that is very similar to swimming. All midfielders usually are advised to practice and execute dodges in as much space around them as possible, and preferably several feet away from the defender. However, this rule is not applicable for the swim move and is most effective when the attacker is in close proximity with the defender. A high-risk reward move, it is advised not to use the move more than 2-3 times in one game. The technique commences with the player trying to induce the defender to poke him or her and then swim over the defender in opposite direction. Care is required to swing the stick in such a way that the ball does not drop out.
The Answer Move
Deployed by only a few midfielders successfully, the answer move is an advanced and highly skilled dodge. The move involves the player running down an alley and getting as close to the goal as possible and shoot the ball using the inside hand. Unlike other dodges, the answer move doesn’t require the player to switch between the hands and therefore springs an element of surprise on the defense. Any player who can execute the answer move correctly is bound to have a better ranking in the team and the game.
Deemer Class executes the answer move with a lot of accuracy and finesse.
The Bull Dodge
Perhaps the coolest of all dodges, the bull dodge involves using your build and strength to enhance your game. It doesn’t really involve any dodges but involves using your build and physique to bully your defender, stop and shoot the goal. Executed properly, it always leaves the defense and viewers in awe.
Sergio Perkovic, the Notre Dame superstar and pro Lacrosse player, is the first name that strikes to exemplify the use of this dodge. The move is often seen in his game and has given him countless goals. If you need the motivation to lift weights, executing bull dodge is perhaps the best reason for it.
Practicing these five dodges will surely uplift your gameplay prowess. As a midfielder, the player often switches between offense and defense. Therefore, it is important to have as many techniques up the sleeve as possible.
This picture describes techniques and little tips on how to dodge correctly, and efficiently.
Dodging initiates scoring in the game of lacrosse. Almost every goal that is scored in the sport of lacrosse started with a dodge. There’s numerous types of dodges in lacrosse; Split, roll, bull, face, rocker-step, and more. These dodges help initiate a play and help scoring opportunities present itself. Like I presented in my last post about lacrosse, about wall balling, about how important it is to practice stick skills, practicing dodges is just as important. My coach taught me this way to practice split dodges. Where you stand in front of a mirror, and do what’s called, “magic hands.” It’s when you just do split dodges in front of a mirror for an ample amount of time until you’re comfortable to whip out the split dodge whenever you feel on the lacrosse field. This video, I posted right underneath this post is a great video to learn about the different dodges in lacrosse, and for you lacrosse readers, help your game immensely.
Recently the Boston Marathon bombings have been all over the news. It’s truly awful. Already 3 people’s lives have been taken at the Boston Marathon, including an 8 year old’s, and a M.I.T. campus police officer has been fatally shot in the head by the two victims. The two victims are Dshokzar Tsarnev, 19, and his brother, Tamerlan Tsarnev, 26, who was killed from a gunfight, are suspected and confirmed as the people who are responsible for all of this tragedy. As of right now, Dshokzar is still at large and the police are looking for him right now.
Right now Boston and surrounding towns are in Marshall Law, where all people are encouraged to stay inside and lock their doors. The media is covering this story very closely and with intricate detail. Imagine if every tragedy in the world was covered in intricate detail like this story? Such as poverty in Africa, serial killers in Russia (generally speaking because it’s a large country), bombings in the Middle East, etc. The news would be OVERFLOWING with tragedy. It’s sad that we don’t even know half of the awful news in the world. Maybe it’s a good thing, since people would be depressed with all of the awfulness the would would be exposed to. Or maybe it’s not a good thing because people wouldn’t know the reality of the world. What do you think is too much detail and too little detail?
The most important thing for lacrosse players to do is to wallball. It’s when lacrosse players literally throw a ball at the wall and then catch it. It’s the key to improve in all aspects of the game. The only way to get your stick skills better and to get rid of that rust after a long time away from the game is to wall ball. Wallball itself helped me be ambidextrous and help me become a great lefty player when I’m a righty. Not only will it help your non-dominant hand, it’ll help your catching abilities and is a great way to help technique in cradling and also, it’s fun.
I use wallballing as a release when sometimes I’m down or really stressed from life or school. For me, it’s an addiction, once I start wallballing, I wanna do it the next day, and the next day. It’s weird. It was a routine of mine when I was in high school so I always did it, and it helped my game out tremendously. For you laxers who are reading, this is my little wall balling routine.
-50 righty throws
-50 lefty throws
-100 split throws
-25 one handed righty
-25 one handed lefty
Here’s a wallballing routine that Ned Crotty, a former Duke all-american attackman, explains his wallballing routine. Here’s a link.
In my opinion, Kid Cudi is one of the greatest artists in our time. He’s primarily a rapper, but honestly, he creates his own genre through his mind. His lyrics are genius and they make you connect with what he’s feeling at the time, and it’s so crazy how he connects with his fans through his songs. With Indicud approaching it’s release date I figured that this post is needed and is needed because I have to spread his greatness because that’s what a real fan like me would do. Literally there’s no song that I dislike even a little bit. That’s how you know an artist is awesome, when you like all of their songs. Kid Cudi has to come to Penn State, it’d be the most epic concert, ever. I’ve included some songs that I enjoy in each of his different albums. All of them are different in it’s own way because that’s how Kid Cudi does it, he’s the best. INDICUD, LONG LIVE SCOTTY MESCUDI.
Songs to listen to:
-Just What I am (Indicud)
-Mojo So Dope (Man on the Moon Pt. 2)
-Day N’ Night (Man on the Moon)
-Love Hard (WZRD)
Haha just kidding, this isn’t the MOST innovative thing since electricity, but it’s pretty cool. Bubba Watson, the all-american golfer came up with a golf hovercraft that can go over the green, and water hazards without making a mess. This hovercraft has less pressure than footsteps, and it looks really fun to ride and drive. I play golf, and the funny thing is, I wouldn’t even want to play golf, all I would want to do is drive this hovercraft around haha. But seriously, if this hovercraft is cheaper to make, and more efficient for the Earth, then why not sell this product at the best country clubs? Here’s the video for the hovercraft, it’s quite awesome actually.
Ok first, CHECK OUT THAT FLOW ON AUSTIN KAUT, swagggg. Ok now to real business,Penn State are right now one of the favorites to win the Colonial Athletic Association. The Nittany Lions (7-3 in season, 2-0 in CAA) are facing the Drexel Dragons (8-2 in season, 3-0 in CAA) in the most anticipated and no doubt the most impotant game of the year. Drexel is the other contender for the CAA championship, and Penn State needs to win this game to make a statement throughout the CAA and the NCAA. One of my former opponents play quite a bit for Drexel. Franky Fusco played for Yorktown, a perennial power in NY, and has already 17 goals and 8 assists as a freshman. Pretty impressive.
Austin Kaut, alongside with the solid defense, are ranked in the top 5 in the country in goals allowed, and overall defense. Right now, Kaut is in the lead for player of the year in the CAA and in the NCAA, this game will be vital in his pursuit as to be the player of the year. After coming off of a 16 save performance at Villanova, Kaut will need another excellent game against Drexel to get the win, this Drexel team is a solid team. Expect a physical game, and a PENN SATE WIN.
Slimy balls are actually the worst things in the sport of lacrosse. They cause easy passes to be overthrown, shots to be wildly off-target, and carelessly dropped balls. The grip of the rubber on the lacrosse ball gets worn down overtime, and eventually becomes “slimy.” There’s some household tricks that help this awful phenomenon that eventually happens to all balls, but it doesn’t always work. After doing some research, I came across a lacrosse ball refurbisher, called “TheLaxDr.” This lacrosse refurbisher removes about .025 mm off the ball to make it as good as new, with a new layer of rubber (Thelaxdr). Every ball can be refurbished up to 30 times and still be intact with NCAA ball specifications and regulations (Thelaxdr). TheLaxDr already supplied more than 100s of college and high school programs and costs $350.00 (Thelaxdr) and it comes with free shipping! A great investment if you ask me. Check out the link below that I posted and see for yourself, the greatness of a great invention.
Since this is mainly a male-dominated class. I’m going to write about something that annoys us all. SHORTS WITHOUT POCKETS. Am I right, or am I right? Pockets are the most underrated things in life. We really never appreciate pockets until we wear shorts.. without pockets. It’s so awkward putting your phone and wallet in your waistband, and it’s not safe. The other day, I was working out listening to music on my phone, wearing shorts without any pockets. So unsafely, I put my phone in my waistband. In the middle of my workout, my phone fell out of my waistband, hit the floor, and died. R.I.P. my phone 🙁 . Shorts without pockets came with the expense of my very expensive iphone, awful. Therefore, a law should be passed that makes all companies that make shorts, make shorts with pockets!
This year’s College Basketball season was absolutely INSANE. So many upsets and number one seeded teams going down unexpectedly. Like how are basketball fans even going to survive March Madness when the regular season was that crazy.. IDK my fellow fans. The tournament has already been crazy so far.. No. 14 Harvard takes down a favorited No. 3 New Mexico squad while No. 12 Ole Miss takes down No. 5 Wisconsin, who is a favorite to go on to the elite 8. Wait, Wichita St. dominates a power from the Big East, Pitt?? WHAT IS GOING ON? The world makes no sense in March, and it’s only going to get crazier, which I’m looking very forward too.
Who’s in your Final Four? And who’s your champion??
I got Louisville, Georgetown, Ohio St. and Miami.
After Miami dominated Duke in Miami, I tweeted that Miami will win it all and I’m stickin with my pick. IT’S ALL ABOUT THE U!
Jack Forster scores 4 to lead Penn State over UMass
After a rough start of the season, it seems as if Penn State is on the right track. After two tough losses, both in overtimes to national champion contender, Notre Dame and a tough Ohio State team, and a very underrated and solid Lehigh team, Penn State bounces back with two consecutive wins against UMass and Binghamton. Penn State played its CAA opener against no. 19 UMass, a team that was undefeated until the first round in the tournament last year, and the tough contest, 7-5. Austin Kaut had an exceptional game with 16 saves, while the defense made noise on ground balls. Jack Forster had 4 goals in the game and led Penn State to victory. This game could be a future CAA championship game, being that in my opinion, Penn State and UMass are the two best teams in the Colonial Athletic Association.
Nick Dolik scores a hat trick in a dominating victory over Binghamton
After a hard fought victory against UMass, Penn State traveled up to Binghamton and had a dominating game, but only won 11-7. At one point, they were up 9-2 and I guess they got a little lenient which led to some goals by Bing in the second half. Austin Kaut tallied 16 saves again, and Nick Dolik scored a hat trick to lead State to victory. Penn State will look to extend their roll and get to a three game winning street as they play St. Joseph’s, another CAA opponent this Saturday (3/23) at home. So if you’re not doing anything come out and support!
Amazon.com: Nick Myers: Explosive Skills & Drills for Offensive Lacrosse (DVD) : Movies & TV
with Nick Myers, Ohio State University Head Coach Develop an explosive dodge, a quick, deceptive shot and get the ball on net more consistently. Nick Myers, Head Coach at The Ohio State University breaks down the fundamental skills and drills that coaches and athletes can use to become a complete offensive lacrosse player. The skills covered include stick work, shooting, and dodging. Myers takes you through each skill by breaking it down as well as explaining how each drill is important to the skill development. STICK WORK Myers shows you how to set up your stick and how to create a pocket to successfully dodge, shoot and bang the ball around the horn. Learn the basics of delivering a crisp, hard pass and the essentials to catching. WALL BALL Go to the wall with a purpose! Develop explosive hands for throwing, shooting and finishing. Included are warm up drills and an eight-part wall ball workout that delivers a competitive progression of skills. This workout includes one cradle, quick sticks, one hand-one cradle, catch & switch, grounders, shovels, cross-hands, and backhands. Effectively use the wall to build muscle and develop a stronger stick. FORM SHOOTING Learn to change up your shot and use deception to make the most of each scoring opportunity. To help your players become complete shooters, Myers demonstrates the finer points of shooting form, types of shots, shots on the run and finishing opportunities. Myers demonstrates the basic skills and drills needed to develop quick hands and to get more shots on-cage. DODGING Breakdown the defense by forcing them to slide, move and rotate. Myers shows you how you can create an explosive, physical dodge.Learn essential speed ladder drills to train effective footwork, speed and explosiveness. Myers teaches the basics of dodging and demonstrates four different types of dodges: the split dodge, the roll dodge, the face dodge and the swim dodge. 121 minutes. 2010.90,000 Kinds of tricks in a dispute. Permissible and unacceptable tricks in a dispute
Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted at http://www.allbest.ru/
- 1. Dispute. Dispute types
- 2. Tricks in an argument
- 4.Anti-gimmick measures
dispute trick permissible impermissible
Debate is a speech genre of dialogical speech, which is based on the discussion of topical issues. In the course of the debate, various (including opposite) points of view are compared, allowing to reveal the indicated problem from different positions. Unlike debates, which are similar in scope to debates, their participants are not limited in how many times they can take the floor.
According to the form of the dispute, the dispute can be oral or written. If an oral argument is conducted in front of the audience, psychological issues play an important role. Speed of reaction and wit are of great importance. The participants are trying not only to convince each other how much to impress the public. A written dispute is considered a more acceptable form of clarifying the truth, therefore, it is of particular value. But if a written dispute drags on too long, readers have time to forget individual conclusions.
There is no sufficiently strict definition of “trick in an argument”. This term usually denotes deliberately incorrect methods of conducting a dispute, a kind of tripping, “sabotage”, attempts to sufficiently roughly manipulate a partner in order to maximize his own interests, belittling an opponent and causing him certain psychological damage. On the one hand, they help to defend their judgment, which the partner must accept as if freely, without feeling pressure on him, on the other hand, they allow just as freely to lead the interlocutor, who is not experienced in logic and the rules of correct dispute, to abandon his own position.Obviously, tricks are often used to significantly complicate an opponent’s dispute.
A fairly large group of dishonest means are psychological tricks (greasing an argument, betting on false shame), with the help of which some polemicists want to facilitate the dispute for themselves and make it difficult for the adversary. They are diverse in nature, many are based on a good knowledge of the characteristics of human psychology, the weaknesses of human nature. Typically, these tricks contain elements of cunning and outright deception.They show a rude, disrespectful attitude towards the opponent. Such tricks in a dispute are considered impermissible.
It is often convenient to use certain tactical methods in a dispute, and sometimes even necessary. It is only important in the heat of an argument not to stoop to rude and impermissible tricks, to keep yourself in control and not to try to hurt your opponent. If one of the parties feels that not entirely correct methods are used in relation to it, you need to properly defend yourself. In order to resist tricks in an argument, you need to know them well enough and be able to recognize them in polemics.
Discussion of trick tactics not only makes the other party less effective, but also makes the other party worry that the former may interrupt the dialogue and complicate the relationship, while he himself risks “losing face”. It may be sufficient to simply raise the issue of the inadmissibility of such tactics, as the use of gimmicks will cease. In the discussion of the “rules of the game” in the dispute, the following positions can be noted:
5. It is necessary to allow the opponent to “let off steam” from time to time in the dispute.Emotions in a dispute are not always pleasant, but still they should be recognized as legitimate. If a person gets the opportunity to free himself even a little from the pressure of unexpressed feelings, he is very likely to be able to think more calmly and this will allow him to focus more on finding a compromise.
1. Vinokur V.A. Tricks in an argument. – SPB .: Speech 2005.
2. Povarin S.V. The art of controversy. On the theory and practice of the dispute. – M., 1996.
3. Melnikova S.V. Business rhetoric.- M., 1999.
Posted on Allbest.ru…
The value of the dispute in life, science, state and public affairs. The connection of logic with legal proceedings and public speaking. Proof of the truth or falsity of the thesis. Tricks in an argument. Rules and errors in relation to the form of argumentation and criticism.
test, added 12/14/2014
Rules and strategies to be followed in a dispute, polemical dialogue.Types of dispute, peculiarities of the strategy and tactics of its conduct. Strategies to discredit the enemy. Disguise of sophism as correct reasoning. Tricks of a sophistic nature.
abstract, added 03/09/2014
The study of dispute as an art. Types of disputes: scientific and business discussions, polemics (dispute for the sake of victory). Strategy and argumentation tactics of disputes. Analysis of tactics and reactions to them. Intentional and unintentional mistakes during the dispute (sophistry).
abstract, added 22.05.2012
The role of evidence in a dispute. An argument as a fragment of a statement containing the rationale for a thought, the acceptability of which seems questionable. Logical arguments as arguments addressed to the mind of the audience. The essence of psychological arguments.
abstract, added 01/19/2012
The process of the formation of an ascetic type of culture in Russia, associated with the establishment of Eastern Christianity in Russia and the nature of relations with Byzantium. Political victory in the dispute between the Josephites and the non-possessors.Kant’s idea of the relationship between reason and culture.
lecture, added 02.24.2011
Concept, structure, types and methods of dispute, its meaning and results. Proponents and Opponents as Subjects of Mass Discussions. Search and confirmation of arguments, their types and role in discussions. A trick as a technique that makes dispute difficult.
abstract, added 09/22/2011
Dispute as a clash of opinions or positions, stages and patterns of its course.Classification criteria and types of dispute, their distinctive features. The main goals and objectives of each type of dispute, techniques and methodology for conducting the discussion process.
abstract, added 11/27/2009
The concept of sophism and its historical origin. Sophisms as a game with language devoid of meaning and purpose. Enriching the language with logical techniques. Examples of sophisms as intellectual tricks and tricks. The concept of logical paradox and aporia, their examples.
abstract, added 15.10.2014
The essence of concepts: sophism, tricks, paradox; their use in discussions. Sophism is a false conclusion that at first glance seems to be correct. The paradox is an absurd but soundly reasoned judgment. Tricks are psychological manipulations of an opponent.
abstract, added 12/26/2011
Dispute as a clash of opinions or positions; discussion, controversy and debate. The art of arguing (eristics), the conditions, the presence of which makes the conversation a dispute.Logical and psychological foundations of the dispute, proof and refutation, psychological tricks.
In the process of business communication, a lot happens that does not fit into the norms of ethics. There are a number of negotiating tactics and tricks. Some of these tricks are known to everyone.
The essence of trick tactics is determined by its purpose. It is a unilateral proposal by which one party wants and can gain an advantage in negotiations; the other is supposed to be aware of it, or is expected to be patient.
The side that realizes that a trick tactic has been used will usually react in two ways. The first characteristic response is to come to terms with the situation. It’s not nice to start with a conflict. Somewhere in your soul, you will give yourself a vow never to deal with such opponents again. But now you are hoping for the best, believing that by yielding a little to the other side, you will appease her, and she will not demand more. Sometimes it happens, but always far away.
The second and most common response is to respond in kind.In other words, if they are trying to deceive you, you do the same, and put forward your counter-threats to the threats. The contest of will begins. Both sides enter into an irreconcilable positional dispute. It usually ends with the termination of negotiations if one of the parties gives up.
The most characteristic methods and techniques of tactics of psychological tricks are presented in this material.
- 1. Use of incomprehensible words and terms. This trick can cause, on the one hand, the impression of the significance of the problem under discussion, the weight of the arguments presented, a high level of professionalism and competence.On the other hand, the use of incomprehensible, “scientific” terms by the initiator of the trick can cause an opposite reaction on the part of the opponent in the form of irritation, alienation or withdrawal into psychological defense. However, the trick succeeds when the interlocutor either hesitates to ask again about something, or pretends to understand what is being said and accept the arguments presented.
- 2. Trap questions. The trick comes down to a set of prerequisites aimed at a one-sided consideration of the problem and “closing the horizon” for choosing different options for its solution.Many of them are emotionally oriented and designed for suggestion. These questions are divided into three groups:
Alternative. This group includes such questions, with the help of which the opponent narrows your choice as much as possible, leaving only one option, according to the principle “either – or”.
Extortion. These are questions like: “Of course, you admit these facts?” or “You certainly don’t deny the statistics?” etc. With such questions, the opponent is trying to get a kind of double advantage.On the one hand, he seeks to convince you to agree with him, and on the other hand, he leaves you with only one opportunity – to passively defend yourself. Counter questions. This type of question is most often used in a situation where the opponent cannot oppose anything to your arguments or does not want to answer a specific question posed. He looks for any loophole to diminish the weight of your evidence and evade an answer.
- 3. Dumbfounded by the speed of discussion, when a fast pace of speech is used in communication and the opponent who perceives the arguments is not able to “process” them.
- 4. Reading thoughts for suspicion. The point of the trick is to divert all sorts of suspicions from oneself using the “mind reading” option. As an example, we can give a judgment of the type: “Maybe you think that I am persuading you? So you are wrong! ”
- 5. Reference to “higher interests” without decoding them. It is very easy, without pressure, just to hint that if the opponent, for example, continues to be intractable in the dispute, then this may affect the interests of those whom it is extremely undesirable to upset.
- 6. Repetition – this is the name of the following psychological trick, the idea of which is to accustom the opponent to any thought. “Carthage must be destroyed” – this is how the speech in the Roman Senate of the Consul Cato ended every time. The trick is to gradually and purposefully accustom the interlocutor to some unsubstantiated statement.
- 7. False shame. This trick consists in using a false argument against the opponent, which he is able to “swallow” without much objection.The trick can be successfully applied in various kinds of judgments, discussions and disputes. Appeals like “You, of course, know that science has now established …” or “Of course, you know that a decision was recently made …” or “You, of course, read about …” lead the opponent into a state false shame, he seems to be embarrassed to say publicly about his ignorance of the things they are talking about.
- 8. Humiliation by irony. This technique is effective when the dispute is unprofitable for some reason. It is possible to disrupt the discussion of the problem, to get away from the discussion with the help of belittling the opponent with irony such as “Sorry, but you are saying things that are beyond my understanding.”Usually, in such cases, the one against whom this trick is directed begins to feel a feeling of dissatisfaction with what has been said and, trying to soften his position, makes mistakes, but of a different nature.
- 9. Demonstration of resentment. This trick is also aimed at disrupting the argument, since a statement like “Who do you really take us for?” clearly demonstrates to the partner that the opposite side cannot continue the discussion, as it feels a sense of obvious dissatisfaction, and most importantly, resentment for some ill-considered actions on the part of the opponent.
- 10. Authority of the statement. With the help of this trick, the psychological significance of one’s own arguments is significantly increased. This can be done effectively by means of a statement like “I am authoritatively declaring to you.”
- 11. The frankness of the statement. In this trick, the emphasis is on the special trust of communication, which is demonstrated with the help of phrases such as, for example, “I will tell you right now (frankly, honestly) …”. This creates the impression that everything that was said before was not fully direct, frank or honest.
- 12. Seeming carelessness. The name of this trick, in fact, already speaks of its essence, “they forget”, and sometimes they do not specifically notice the inconvenient and dangerous arguments of the opponent. Not to notice that which can harm – this is the purpose of the trick.
- 13. Flattering turns of speech. The peculiarity of this trick is to “sprinkle the opponent with sugar of flattery”, to hint to him how much he can win or, on the contrary, lose if he persists in his disagreement. An example of a flattering turn of speech is the statement “As an intelligent person, you cannot help but see that… “.
- 14. Building on a past statement. The main thing in this trick is to draw the opponent’s attention to his past statement, which contradicts his reasoning in this dispute, and to demand an explanation on this matter. Such clarifications can (if it is beneficial) lead the discussion to a dead end or provide information about the nature of the opponent’s changed views, which is also important for the initiator of the trick.
- 15. Reducing the argument to private opinion. The purpose of this trick is to accuse your opponent that the arguments they give in defense of their thesis or to refute your statement are nothing more than just a personal opinion, which, like the opinion of any other person, can be erroneous.Addressing the interlocutor with the words “What you are now saying is just your personal opinion” will unwittingly tune him to the tone of objections, give rise to a desire to challenge the expressed opinion about the arguments given by him. If the interlocutor succumbs to this trick, the subject of controversy, against his will and in favor of the plan of the initiator of the trick, is shifted towards discussing a completely different problem, where the opponent will prove that the arguments expressed by him are not only his personal opinion.Practice confirms that if this happened, then the trick was a success.
- 16. Silence. The desire to deliberately withhold information from the interlocutor is the most commonly used trick in any form of discussion. In a rivalry with a business partner, it is much easier to simply hide information from him than to challenge it in polemics. The ability to competently hide something from your opponent is the most important component of the art of diplomacy. In this regard, we note that the professionalism of a polemicist consists precisely in skillfully avoiding the truth without resorting to lies.
- 17. Growing demands. It is based on the opponent increasing his demands with each subsequent concession. This tactic has two distinct advantages. The first of them boils down to the fact that the initial need to yield on the entire negotiation problem is removed. The second contributes to the emergence of a psychological effect, which makes you quickly agree with the next requirement of the other side, until she put forward new, more significant claims.
- 18.”Avoiding” unwanted discussion. You can get away from unwanted discussion by resorting to a magnificent speech with vivid epithets and eloquent interjections. For example, you ask the interlocutor why the payments under the contract are delayed? And he answers as extensively and convincingly as Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev: “Yes, we agree, there were some delays in payments. We have carefully studied the causes, as well as the possibilities for eliminating them. These reasons were varied. Both objective and subjective factors took place.Currently, this issue is receiving special attention. We are working a lot in this direction. All this is done in the interests of our common cause. Great prospects are opening up here for further successful cooperation, which will lead us to a brighter future. ”
- 19. A well-known tactic is “waiting”. This is a very slow, gradual opening of its positions – it is like slicing thin slices of sausage. This technique helps to find out as much information as possible and only then formulate your own proposals.
Permissive tricks. The grossest impermissible tricks. Complication and modification of stick arguments. Psychological tricks. Sophisms: a retreat from the task of the dispute. Deviations from the thesis. False arguments. Arbitrary arguments. Imaginary evidence. Sophisms of inconsistency. Anti-gimmick measures.
Trick in an argument refers to any technique with which they want to facilitate a dispute for themselves or complicate a dispute for an adversary.
(Wikipedia) Permissive tricks in disputes can be considered:
13) Suspension of the dispute by one or both parties for valid reasons.
14) When the dispute aggravates and the dispute enters an unacceptable phase (violation), the dispute can be stopped by one (even the wrong one) party to its own advantage.
15) Appeal to an independent person or source with a request for clarification of inaccuracies, etc.
The crudest impermissible tricks:
14. “mechanical” – do not allow the enemy to speak.
15. Departure “aside” from the topic of the ongoing dispute with the transition to “personalities” – indications of: profession, nationality, position held, physical defects, mental disorders.
16. Shouting and obscene language, mutual insults, shouts and insults of third parties.
17. Threats and hooligan antics.
18. Assault and fight: as an extreme measure of the so-called “proof” of right or wrong.
Stick drive – a situation in a dispute in which any attempt to exert pressure is used and thereby prevent an opponent from expressing his point of view.
(SI Povarnin) The most popular modifications and complications of stick arguments are “readings in hearts”.This trick consists in the fact that the opponent does not so much analyze your words as the secret motives that made you express them. Sometimes “reading in hearts” takes a different form: it looks for a motive for which a person does not say anything or write. Innuendo should also be included in these categories of controversy tricks. A person seeks to undermine in listeners or readers the trust in his opponent, and, consequently, in his arguments, and uses insidious irresponsible hints for this purpose.
Among the gross changes in cane methods, it is worth noting: making oneself a victim, to evoke pity, a false rejection of the argument.
Psychological tricks (unbalancing the opponent):
· irritate the enemy and infuriate him (switching to “personalities”, insult, mockery, mockery, obviously unfair, outrageous accusations).
· speak very quickly, express thoughts often in a difficult to understand form, quickly replace one with the other.
· “Greasing arguments”
Arrogance, demand for self-respect
False Shame Bet
Throwing a dispute
Unfounded accusation of stubbornness
Comparing something incomparable
· When comparing something, say that it cannot be compared (of course, it means when it is possible). In this case, it is advisable to ask your opponent why.Moreover, be sure to go into details (Otherwise, you will get a very stupid answer, and it is always difficult to find counter-arguments to stupid answers due to the fact that they are weakly connected with logic).
Sophisms (deliberate errors in proof) are among the most common and favorite tricks in an argument.
Sophisms, consisting in deviations from the dispute task and in “digression from the thesis”, an infinite number. You can start a dispute with this sophism or mistake, immediately taking, for example, the wrong thesis that you need; you can do it in the middle of an argument.You can completely discard the previous thesis, you can only change it more or less, etc., etc.
· substitution of a dispute over a thesis with a dispute over evidence. The main goal is to prove the inconsistency of the opponent’s argumentation, thereby, in the eyes of the majority, to come to the conclusion that his thesis has been refuted.
· translation of a dispute into contradictions. The goal is to indicate that the enemy contradicts himself, thereby showing him and others the falsity of his thesis, for the most part not related to his judgments.
· translation of a dispute into a contradiction between word and deed; between the views of the enemy and his misdeeds, life, etc.
· “incomplete refutation” (a long and thorough refutation of 1-2 simple and unimportant arguments, while the more important ones are relegated to the background. The effect of victory is created in the eyes of the audience).
· non-essential refutation (The Sophist does not refute the very essence of a complex controversial thought. He takes some unimportant particulars of it and refutes them, but pretends to refute the thesis).
Deviation from the thesis.
· “to sabotage” (completely leave aside the previous task of the dispute, an unsuccessful thesis or argument during a dispute and go on to others)
the defender of the thesis quits proving his thesis, and begins to refute ours or demands that we prove our thesis
· change the thesis, while pretending to prove the previous one (“people are egoists” is changed to “all people are egoists”)
· strengthening and softening of the thesis (“ministers are mediocre” is strengthened by “ministers – are they idiots?”).
· a thought that is presented with a certain reservation, with certain conditions under which it is true, is replaced by the same thought, but already expressed “in general”, without any conditions and reservations.
translation of the question to the point of view of benefit or harm
False arguments – “False evidence”
A false argument in a dispute is any openly false information used by one of the parties (disputant, disputing) in order to prove their point of view on a subject or situation.Bringing a false argument is usually an indicator of the weakness of the position in the dispute of the party that resorts to false argument and disinformation. The calculation of the disputing party when making a false argument is made on the lack of competence in the issue of the dispute of the other party, and is designed to strengthen its position in a disputable situation. Destruction of a false argument by an adversary party can be carried out by bringing an independent point of view, references to documents on the subject of the dispute, etc.
These are arguments brought by a third (indirect) party to the parties to the dispute, and do not have a bright semantic coloring for a specific point of view on the subject of the dispute.Arbitrary arguments, as a rule, are neither evidence nor refutation, and to a large extent carrying a sense of superficial judgment, interfere and distract the disputing parties from resolving the dispute and finding the truth.
Identity (A reliable or more probable thought is made a thesis, and a less probable thought – an argument for proving this thesis)
· “The argument is weaker than the thesis.”
· Circle in proof.
Sophisms of inconsistency (the thesis “does not follow” from the arguments): false generalization, sifting of facts, manipulation of facts, substitution of concepts, “woman’s” or “lady’s” argument (the most extreme and most absurd opposite of other conceivable solutions of the question is chosen and opposed to one’s opinion , it is proposed to make a choice: either to admit this absurdity, or to accept his thought.), an imposed consequence (the imposition of a thought is an absurd consequence that does not follow from it at all), a multi-question (questions are asked to the opponent, which cannot be answered yes or no, and this requires exactly this).
Anti-gimmick methods : a) argue only about what you know well; b) not to argue unnecessarily with a swindler of a word or with a “boorish” in a dispute, and if you need to argue, then be “on the alert” all the time; c) learn to “cover” the dispute, and not wander from argument to argument; d) in every possible way to remain calm and complete self-control in the dispute; e) carefully and clearly clarify the thesis and all the main arguments – your own and the enemy’s; f) reject all arguments that are not relevant to the case.
A trick in a dispute is any technique with the help of which one wants to facilitate a dispute for oneself and make it difficult for an opponent.
The practice of public disputes, since ancient times, has developed many such methods, varied in nature and essence.
Withdrawal from the dispute. One of the participants feels that the dispute is not in his favor, that he does not have sufficient arguments, and tries to “slip out of the dispute”, “muffle the dispute”, “finish the dispute.”
Disruption of the dispute. Sometimes the enemy is interested in disrupting the dispute, since he is beyond his power, unprofitable for any reason.In such cases, they resort to crude “mechanical” tricks: they interrupt the enemy, do not allow him to speak, clearly show unwillingness to listen to the opponent – they pinch their ears, hum, whistle, laugh, stamp their feet, etc. Sometimes these actions are performed by listeners, wanting to support their like-minded person and harm his opponent. This technique is called “obstruction” (deliberate disruption of the dispute).
“Argument to the city officer.” The opponent’s thesis is declared dangerous for the state or society. The opponent, in fact, is “gagged”, the argument ends, the victory is on the side of the trick.
“Stick reasons”. An argument is made that the opponent must accept for fear of something unpleasant, often dangerous, or to which he cannot answer for the same reason and must either be silent or come up with some “workarounds”.
A trick called “reading in hearts” is considered a kind of “argument to the city” and “stick arguments”. Its essence lies in the fact that the opponent does not so much analyze the words of the enemy as refers to the motives that forced them to express (“You speak out of pity for him”; “You are forced to speak like this by the interests of this organization”; “You are pursuing personal interests.” etc.NS.).
Innuendo also belongs to impermissible tricks. The word innuendo (lat.) Means “a slanderous fabrication intended to discredit someone; malicious fiction, slander. ” The essence of the technique lies in the fact that a party to the dispute, wishing to discredit his opponent, undermine his confidence, and, consequently, to his arguments, uses irresponsible hints and statements, for example, “It is clear what you were doing during this visit …” , “We will figure out where you got the funds for the construction of a new summer cottage”, “Yes, we know how you spend your free time.”
Psychological tricks make up a fairly large group of dishonest means. They are diverse in nature, many are based on a good knowledge of the characteristics of human psychology, the weaknesses of human nature. Typically, these tricks contain elements of cunning and outright deception. They show a rude, disrespectful attitude towards the opponent.
Let’s look at some of them.
Unbalance the enemy. For this, rude antics, insults, clearly unfair, mocking accusations, etc. are used.p. If the enemy “boiled” – the case is won. He lost the chance to succeed in an argument.
A bet on false shame. It is known that people often want to seem better than they really are, they are afraid to “drop themselves” in the eyes of others.
It is this desire to look a little better that some experienced polemicists play on. For example, giving an unproven or even false conclusion, the enemy accompanies it with the phrases: “You, of course, know what science has established long ago”; “Don’t you still know?”; “It is a well-known fact” and under., that is, he relies on false shame. If a person does not admit that he does not know this, he is “hooked” with the enemy and is forced to agree with his arguments.
Greasing the argument. Another related trick, based on self-esteem, is called argument smearing. A weak argument that can be easily challenged is accompanied by a compliment to the opponent. For example: “You, as an intelligent person, will not deny.”
Suggestion. In a public debate, both opponents and listeners are strongly influenced by suggestion.Therefore, one should not succumb to such a common trick as a self-confident, peremptory, decisive tone. A person who speaks with aplomb, an imposing voice, psychologically puts pressure on those present.
Reference to age, education, position. Often in disputes, references to their age, education and position are used as arguments. Quite often we are faced with such reasoning: “Now live to see my age, then judge”; “First, get your diploma, and then we’ll talk”; “If you take my place, then you will reason” and others.However, it is known that a person who is older in age, has a higher education, holds a certain position, is not always right. Therefore, one should not immediately surrender positions and retreat; it is necessary to demand that the opponent makes more weighty and convincing arguments.
“Double-entry bookkeeping”. This trick is based on the tendency of people to have duality of assessments: one measure for ourselves and for what is beneficial and pleasant for us, another – for other people and for what we do not like.In a dispute, the same argument can be true when it suits us, and erroneous if it doesn’t suit us. When we refute someone with this argument, it is true, and when it refutes us, it is false.
Quite common in disputes and logical tricks, the so-called sophisms, or deliberate errors in the proof. It should be remembered that sophism and error differ only in that sophism is intentional, and error is not intentional. Therefore, as there are logical errors, there are so many sophisms.Let us dwell on some sophistic tricks.
Leaving the conversation aside. Often we have to observe such situations when the participants in the discussion of a controversial problem find it difficult to find the necessary arguments. In order to avoid defeat, to make it not so noticeable, they in every possible way divert the conversation aside, distract the attention of opponents with secondary questions, stories on abstract topics.
Translation of a dispute into contradictions between word and deed. It is also possible to get away from the subject of discussion, to leave aside the thesis put forward with the help of such a trick – to translate the dispute into contradictions between word and deed, the views of the enemy and his actions, the way of life.Having shown the inconsistency of the put forward thesis with the actions of the opponent, they put the opponent in an awkward position, and practically reduce the dispute to nothing. This trick affects not only the enemy, but also the witnesses of the dispute.
Translation of the question to the point of view of benefit or harm. Instead of proving the truth of this or that position, it turns out whether it is beneficial for us or not. And it is understandable that when we feel that a given offer is beneficial to us, although it has harmful consequences for others, we are more likely to agree with it.It is this weakness that unscrupulous disputants take advantage of. They begin to put pressure on the opponent, emphasizing the advantages of their position for the opponent. Such arguments are called convenient, profitable. And they sometimes have just a hypnotic effect.
Action time offset. Sometimes disputants use the following trick: in the process of reasoning, they shift the time of action, replace what is true for the past and present with what will happen in the future.
It is not uncommon for polemicists to resort to tricks related to the misuse of questions and answers.These include, for example, the so-called “many-question error”. The opponent is asked several different questions at once under the guise of one and require an immediate answer yes or no. But the fact is that the sub-questions included in the question asked are directly opposite to each other, one of them requires an answer yes, and the other no. The respondent, without noticing this, answers only one of the questions. The questioner takes advantage of this, arbitrarily applies the answer to another question, and confuses the opponent.This trick was used in the ancient world. This is a typical question of this kind. The disciple was asked: “Have you stopped beating your father? Yes or no?” If the respondent says “yes”, then it turns out that he beat his father, if he says “no”, then it turns out that he continues to beat his father. Obviously, such a question cannot be answered in the form of “yes” or “no”. The student should have said something like this: “I can’t even think about hitting my father, because there can be no greater shame for my son.”
In disputes, situations are not uncommon when polemicists, for various reasons, try to evade the questions posed. Sometimes they simply ignore the question, as if not noticing it.
Some polemicists begin to sneer at the questions of their opponent. They psychologically act on the opponent, as they show a disrespectful attitude towards him. This allows the person pronouncing such phrases to get away from the questions posed, to leave them unanswered.
The most common in a dispute is considered “answering a question to a question.” Not wishing to answer the question posed or having difficulty in finding an answer, the polemicist puts a counter question to the opponent’s question.
The polemicists also resort to such a peculiar trick as “answer on credit.” Experiencing difficulties in discussing the problem, they transfer the answer to “later”, referring to the complexity of the question.
These are some of the dishonest tactics one has to deal with in disputes.
In a dispute, it is necessary to be extremely honest, truthful, but often these requirements are not respected. It is associated with the possibility of making mistakes, making mistakes, and sometimes a conscious desire to confuse an opponent or partner with the help of such arguments and arguments. To prove the truth of the thesis, arguments are given, the most weighty are arguments based on statistical data, on examples from life, as well as quotes from the works of famous writers of poets. When arguing, it is necessary to distinguish between the concept of fact or opinion.A fact is an event that actually takes place that actually happened. Opinion is a judgment, often based on subjective assessments, it can be biased, biased, erroneous. Therefore, the most powerful evidence is facts. Opinions must be viewed critically, taking into account both historical and specific conditions. It is very important, during the dispute, to take into account the emotional state, their relationship to the subject of speech. The art of argumentation consists not only in the truth of one’s judgments, but also in the ability to refute the opponent’s point of view, to expose his incorrect judgments.To conduct a dispute, it is necessary to strictly observe the laws of logic, which impose certain requirements in relation to the thesis of the proof. There should be a logical certainty of the thesis, in the process of a dispute it is not worth replacing the thesis with another. Proof and refutation in a dispute perform different functions; for evidence, a positive role of substantiating an idea is required, and for refutation, a critical one. The refutation is carried out in three ways: the thesis is refuted, the arguments are criticized, the inconsistency of the demonstration is shown, that is, those forms and methods of proof that the opponent uses.The most effective is the refutation of the thesis, for this, real facts, events, statistical data, eyewitness accounts, as well as the results of experimental studies are cited. The refutation of the arguments is less effective; it is necessary to show their inconsistency. In this case, the use of humor, irony, sarcasm is considered an effective tool. Often, such a technique as a return blow or a boomerang technique is also used, a variation is a pick-up of a reply, an interception of the opponent’s initiative, an attack with his questions, as well as psychological arguments, such as an argument for a person’s personal qualities, an argument to the public.A reference to authority, statements or actions by a person who is influential.
A form of hidden struggle in an argument is tricks, they can be very different. Argument tricks are tactics and techniques designed to make it harder for an opponent to justify their ideas. With tricks, a person can easily win any dispute. Tricks are divided into two types: acceptable and unacceptable. Permissible tricks are used when we see that the enemy is using inappropriate techniques in a dispute, in this case it is necessary to create a kind of trap in the dispute, into which this dishonest person will fall.Tricks of “ignoring the argument” are used when they pretend that the opponent has no strong argument in the dispute or believe that this argument is not consistent. The trick “delaying the objection” is considered acceptable – this trick is used in order to collect thoughts. “Excessive clarification” – clarification of a fact, from generalization to specificity. Arguments that violate the rules for conducting polemics are considered unacceptable – getting out of a dispute, breaking up a dispute, opposition to personal qualities, reading in hearts.The exit from the dispute occurs when one of the opponents is unable to maintain the dispute. Disruption of the dispute occurs when the opponent seeks to interrupt the opponent, shows unwillingness to listen to his arguments. Reading in the hearts is associated with attributing to the opponent side motives of the dispute. Argument to the city commander – this trick is used to suppress the enemy in the event that the thesis or argument put forward by the opponent is declared dangerous for society and the state. Stepping aside – when the opponent is imposing his own subject of discussion.Stick arguments – its essence is that the opponent must accept this argument out of fear of something unpleasant and dangerous, as a rule, it is used when there is a clear preponderance of forces and in the absence of legal guarantees. Particularly difficult are psychological tricks associated with quick speech, self-confident tone. Greasing an argument or flattery. A bet on false shame. Reference to your age, education, position. Sticking labels. In a dispute with a woman, they use references to the imperfection of female logic.The desire to unbalance the enemy. Shooting with beautiful phrases. Discrediting, undermining the authority of your opponent.
In order to neutralize tricks, you need to know them well, be very attentive to your interlocutor, in order to be able to catch these tricks in a dispute, to have quick thinking and instant reaction. Many different questions are used in disputes, the ability to ask questions is an important sign of a person’s intelligence and discernment. Questions can be clarifying when we want to find out the truth or falsity of a judgment.Also, questions can be explanatory, they arise due to inaccurate wording or lack of understanding of the audience. Questions can be additional, go beyond the content of the topic under discussion, or the problem. In addition to questions about the content, there are questions about the form. In terms of form, questions are divided into two types: complex and simple. Simple questions are asked about only one problem and require a monosyllabic answer. Difficult questions include a few interrogative words. By their nature, the questions are divided into: neutral, benevolent and unwilling, provocative.The nature of the question can be recognized by the tone of the question. In order to react correctly to it.
Humor, irony, sarcasm enhance the emotional impact on the audience, help to defuse a tense atmosphere. An ironic remark can confuse an opponent.
Reception of a boomerang (“beat the enemy with his own weapon”) is that the thesis or argument turns against the one who expressed them.
“What is he really,” Chichikov thought to himself, “for a fool, is he taking me?” – and then added aloud:
– It’s strange to me, really: it seems that some kind of theatrical performance or comedy is taking place between us, otherwise I cannot explain to myself … You seem to be a rather smart person, possess information of education. After all, the subject is just fu-fu. What is it worth? Who needs?
– Why, you are buying, therefore, you need it.
Here Chichikov bit his lip and could not find what to answer.
(N. V. Gogol. “Dead Souls”)
Reduction to absurdity – the falsity of the thesis is demonstrated, since the consequences arising from it contradict reality.
The famous Russian lawyer FN Plevako defended the old woman who stole a tin kettle worth 50 kopecks. The prosecutor’s thesis was this: private property is sacred; if people are allowed to encroach on it, the country will perish. F.N.Plevako spoke as follows:
“Russia had to endure many troubles and trials for its more than a thousand-year existence.Pechenegs tormented her, Polovtsy, Tatars, Poles. Twelve languages fell upon her, took Moscow. Russia endured everything, overcame everything, only got stronger and grew from the trials. But now, now … the old lady stole an old kettle worth 50 kopecks. Russia, of course, will not be able to withstand this, from this it will perish irrevocably. ”
The verdict was acquitted.
Attack with questions – in a dispute it is important to ask questions, answering is always more difficult than asking. The purpose of this technique is to seize the initiative, to make the opponent’s position difficult.
– But let’s say you’re right. Let’s say that I treacherously catch you at your word in order to betray the police. All are arrested and then tried. But will it be worse for you in court and in prison than here? And if they are sent to a settlement and even to hard labor, is it worse than sitting in this outbuilding? Not worse, I suppose … Why be afraid?
Apparently, these words had an effect on Ivan Demyanovich. He sat down obediently.
(A.P. Chekhov. “Chamber No. 6”)
An argument to a person – instead of substantiating the thesis, they try to rely on the feelings and moods of the listeners, they begin to evaluate not the actions of a person, but his merits and demerits.
“When the assistant prosecutor was able to prove that the defendant was guilty and did not deserve leniency, when he understood, convinced and said:“ I have finished, ”the defender stood up. Everyone pricked up their ears. There was silence. The lawyer began to speak, and … the nerves of … the public went dancing! ..
– We are people, gentlemen of the jury chairmen, and we will also judge in a human way! – said, by the way, the defender. – Before appearing before you, this man suffered a six-month pre-trial detention.For six months, the wife was deprived of her beloved spouse, the eyes of the children did not dry out from tears at the thought that there was no dear father near them! Oh, if you only looked at these children! They are hungry because there is no one to feed them, they cry because they are deeply unhappy … But look! They hold out their little hands to you, asking you to return everything to their father! ..
The defender spoke and spoke … He passed the facts, and pressed more on psychology. ”
(A. P. Chekhov. “Case from judicial practice”).90,000 Tricks and speculative tricks in business communication
Author: Ilya Isakovich Aminov, candidate of psychological sciences, consultant psychologist.
In the process of business communication, a lot happens that does not fit into the norms of ethics. There are a number of negotiating tactics and tricks. Some of these tricks are known to everyone.
The essence of a ploy is determined by its purpose. It is a unilateral proposal by which one party wants and can gain an advantage in negotiations; the other is supposed to be aware of it, or is expected to be patient.
The side that realizes that a trick tactic has been used will usually react in two ways. The first characteristic response is to come to terms with the situation. It’s not nice to start with a conflict. Somewhere in your soul, you will give yourself a vow never to deal with such opponents again. But now you are hoping for the best, believing that by yielding a little to the other side, you will appease her, and she will not demand more. Sometimes it happens, but always far away.
The second and most common response is to respond in kind.In other words, if they are trying to deceive you, you do the same, and put forward your counter-threats to the threats. The contest of will begins. Both sides enter into an irreconcilable positional dispute. It usually ends with the termination of negotiations if one of the parties gives up.
The most typical speculative methods and tactics of psychological tricks are presented below.
1. Use of incomprehensible words and terms. This trick can cause, on the one hand, the impression of the significance of the problem under discussion, the weight of the arguments presented, a high level of professionalism and competence.On the other hand, the use of incomprehensible, “scientific” terms by the initiator of the trick can cause an opposite reaction on the part of the opponent in the form of irritation, alienation or withdrawal into psychological defense. However, the trick succeeds when the interlocutor either hesitates to ask again about something, or pretends to understand what is being said and accept the arguments presented.
2. Trap questions. The trick comes down to a set of prerequisites aimed at a one-sided consideration of the problem and “closing the horizon” for choosing different options for its solution.Many of them are emotionally oriented and designed for suggestion. These questions are divided into three groups:
- Alternative. This group includes such questions, with the help of which the opponent narrows your choice as much as possible, leaving only one option, according to the principle “either – or”. These cleverly phrased questions have a formidable impact and are relatively good substitutes for all statements and statements.
- Extortion. These are questions like: “Of course, you admit these facts?” or “You certainly don’t deny the statistics?” etc.n. With such questions the opponent is trying to get a sort of double advantage. On the one hand, he seeks to convince you to agree with him, and on the other hand, he leaves you with only one opportunity – to passively defend yourself. In this situation, do not hesitate to say: “Sorry, Ivan Vasilyevich, but the course of our business conversation gives me the right to put the question like this:“ Are we going to reach a reasonable agreement on the issue under discussion together quickly and with minimal effort, or will we engage in a “tough bargaining” in which will the more stubborn of us win, but not common sense? ”
- Counter-questions.This type of question is most often used in a situation where the opponent cannot oppose anything to your arguments or does not want to answer a specific question posed. He looks for any loophole to diminish the weight of your evidence and evade an answer.
3. Dumbfounded by the speed of discussion, when a fast pace of speech is used in communication and the opponent who perceives the arguments is not able to “process” them. In this case, the rapidly changing stream of thoughts simply confuses the interlocutor and introduces him into a state of discomfort.
4. Reading thoughts for suspicion. The point of the trick is to divert all sorts of suspicions from yourself using the mind-reading option. As an example, we can give a judgment of the type: “Maybe you think that I am persuading you? You are wrong!”
5. Reference to “higher interests” without decoding them. It is very easy, without pressure, just to hint that if the opponent, for example, continues to be intractable in the dispute, then this may affect the interests of those whom it is extremely undesirable to upset.
6. Repetition – this is the name of the following psychological trick, the idea of which is to accustom the opponent to any thought. “Carthage must be destroyed” – this is how the speech in the Roman Senate of the Consul Cato the Elder ended every time. The trick is to gradually and purposefully accustom the interlocutor to some unsubstantiated statement. Then, after repeated repetition, this statement is declared obvious.
7.False shame. This trick consists in using a false argument against the opponent, which he is able to “swallow” without much objection. The trick can be successfully applied in various kinds of judgments, discussions and disputes. Appeals like “You, of course, know that science has now established …” or “Of course, you know that a decision was recently made …” or “You, of course, read about …” lead the opponent into a state of false shame, it seems to him it’s awkward to say publicly about the ignorance of the things that are being said.In these cases, most of the people against whom this trick is used nod or pretend to remember what it is about, thereby acknowledging all these, sometimes false, arguments.
8. Humiliation by irony. This technique is effective when the dispute is unprofitable for some reason. It is possible to disrupt the discussion of the problem, to get away from the discussion with the help of belittling the opponent with irony such as “Sorry, but you are saying things that are beyond my understanding.” Usually, in such cases, the one against whom this trick is directed begins to feel a feeling of dissatisfaction with what has been said and, trying to soften his position, makes mistakes, but of a different nature.
9. Demonstration of resentment. This trick is also aimed at disrupting the argument, since a statement like “Who do you really take us for?” clearly demonstrates to the partner that the opposite side cannot continue the discussion, as it feels a sense of obvious dissatisfaction, and most importantly, resentment for some ill-considered actions on the part of the opponent.
10. Authority of the statement. With the help of this trick, the psychological significance of one’s own arguments is significantly increased.This can be done effectively by means of a statement like “I am authoritatively declaring to you.” Such a turn of speech by a partner is usually perceived as a clear signal of an increase in the significance of the arguments being expressed, and therefore, as a determination to firmly defend one’s position in a dispute.
11. The frankness of the statement. In this trick, the emphasis is on the special confidentiality of communication, which is demonstrated with the help of phrases such as, for example, “I will tell you right now (frankly, honestly) …” This creates the impression that everything that was said before was not complete least directly, frankly or honestly.
12. Seeming carelessness. The name of this trick, in fact, already speaks of its essence, “they forget”, and sometimes they do not specifically notice the inconvenient and dangerous arguments of the opponent. Not to notice that which can harm – this is the purpose of the trick.
13. Flattering turns of speech. The peculiarity of this trick is to “sprinkle the opponent with sugar of flattery”, to hint to him how much he can win or, on the contrary, lose if he persists in his disagreement. An example of a flattering turn of speech is the statement “As an intelligent person, you cannot help but see that …”
14.Building on a past statement. The main thing in this trick is to draw the opponent’s attention to his past statement, which contradicts his reasoning in this dispute, and to demand an explanation on this matter. Such clarifications can (if it is beneficial) lead the discussion to a dead end or provide information about the nature of the opponent’s changed views, which is also important for the initiator of the trick.
15. Reducing the argument to private opinion. The purpose of this trick is to accuse your opponent that the arguments they give in defense of their thesis or to refute your statement are nothing more than just a personal opinion, which, like the opinion of any other person, can be erroneous.Addressing the interlocutor with the words “What you are now saying is just your personal opinion” will unwittingly tune him to the tone of objections, give rise to a desire to challenge the expressed opinion about the arguments given by him.
If the interlocutor succumbs to this trick, the subject of controversy, contrary to his will and in favor of the plan of the initiator of the trick, is shifted towards the discussion of a completely different problem, where the opponent will prove that the arguments expressed by him are not only his personal opinion.Practice confirms that if this happened, then the trick was a success.
16. Silence. The desire to deliberately withhold information from the interlocutor is the most commonly used trick in any form of discussion. In a rivalry with a business partner, it is much easier to simply hide information from him than to challenge it in polemics. The ability to competently hide something from your opponent is the most important component of the art of diplomacy. In this regard, we note that the professionalism of a polemicist consists precisely in skillfully avoiding the truth without resorting to lies.
17. Growing demands. It is based on the opponent increasing his demands with each subsequent concession. This tactic has two distinct advantages. The first of them boils down to the fact that the initial need to yield on the entire negotiation problem is removed. The second contributes to the emergence of a psychological effect, which makes you quickly agree with the next requirement of the other side, until she put forward new, more significant claims.
18.The accusation of theorizing. This trick corresponds to the well-known saying: “It was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines.” The use of this trick in a dispute, that is, the statement that everything the partner is talking about is good only in theory, but unacceptable in practice, will force him to prove the opposite with impromptu arguments, which ultimately can heat up the atmosphere of discussion and reduce the discussion to mutual attacks and accusations.
19. “Avoiding” unwanted discussion. You can get away from unwanted discussion by resorting to a magnificent speech with vivid epithets and eloquent interjections.For example, you ask the interlocutor why the payments under the contract are delayed? And he answers as extensively and convincingly as Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev: “Yes, we agree, there were some delays in payments. We have carefully studied the causes, as well as the possibilities for eliminating them. These reasons were varied. Both objective and subjective factors took place. Currently, this issue is receiving special attention. We are working a lot in this direction. All this is done in the interests of our common cause.Great prospects are opening up here for further successful cooperation, which will lead us to a brighter future. ”
Another very nice way to get away from unwanted discussions is to joke. For example, the president of a bank asks the head of an audit firm why a report on the audit of financial activities has not yet been submitted. Instead of lengthy excuses, the auditor can laugh it off: “Have you noticed that we are preparing a report for you faster and faster each time?” Such an answer, we hope, will make the banker smile or release some caustic wit.
Lack of a sense of humor is a diagnosis that anyone, even a very domineering person, is afraid of. Responding to a joke is a natural response. Agree, it’s better to laugh it off than to start a long statement of all the reasons that prevented you from conducting an audit on time and submitting this very report. Humiliating excuses can end in the saddest way for you.
20. Well-known tactics include “waiting”, or, in diplomatic jargon, “salami”. This is a very slow, gradual opening of its positions – it is like slicing thin slices of sausage.This technique helps to find out as much information as possible and only then formulate your own proposals.
So, we’ve analyzed twenty gimmick tactics that are common in business communication. Concluding their consideration, we will give several recommendations. Reacting to gimmick tactics effectively means:
- to reveal the very fact of using this tactic;
- to directly bring this issue up for discussion;
- to question the legality of its application, that is, to talk openly about this issue.
You can fully study the methods of resisting the tricks and manipulations of the interlocutor in the course “Practical Logic and Argumentation”.90,000 Argument tricks and their characteristics Argument trick is any technique with which one wants to facilitate a dispute for oneself or make it difficult for an opponent.
A great contribution to the development of the theory of tricks was made by the ancient Greek thinker Aristotle, the German philosopher A. Schopenhauer, the Russian logician S.Povarnin and other researchers (K. Pavlova, P. Mitsich, L. Averyanov, I. Melnik, A. Nikiforov, etc.), who managed to significantly improve the classification of possible tricks in disputes in their works.
Analyzing the previous experience in the systematization of tricks and expanding their arsenal of use, we will bring the whole set of tricks into three groups: organizational-procedural, psychological and logical:
1. Organizational-procedural tricks
The tricks of this group can be used only by the organizer of the meeting process or discussion.They are oriented either at disrupting the discussion, or at deliberately clashing the opposing views of the participants in the discussion in order to inflame the atmosphere, or at reducing the negotiations to a discussion option that is obviously unacceptable for the opponent. Let’s give the characteristics of the main organizational and procedural tricks.
1.1. Formation of the primary installation .
The essence of the trick is to initially give the floor to those whose opinion is known, appeals to others and is able to form in them a certain attitude towards the perception of an idea.In this case, the “frame” effect is triggered, according to which the tonality and directionality at the beginning of the discussion forms in the minds of those around them the necessary attitude towards their directed perception of certain provisions of the problem under discussion.
1.2. Provision of materials only the day before
This trick consists in providing discussion participants with working materials (projects, contracts, programs, etc.) intended for discussion, shortly before its start, when it is simply physically difficult to familiarize with these materials.
1.3. Avoiding re-discussion
The trick succeeds when decisions are rigidly fixed and deliberately not allowed to be re-discussed, even when new, noteworthy data arrives that can influence the development of a final decision.
1.4. The heat of the atmosphere by the “aggressors” of the dispute
The trick implies alternately giving the floor to aggressive opponents who allow mutual insults, which are suppressed only formally, for the sake of appearance.As a result, the atmosphere of the discussion heats up to a critical one, and to the question addressed to the participants in the discussion: “Shall we discuss further?”, As a rule, the majority is inclined to answer: “No!”
1.5. Priority voting continuity
The gimmick is to put proposals to the vote not in the order in which they are received, but according to the degree of their acceptability for the interested party so that the wavering ones can “cast their votes” more quickly.
1.6. Suspension of Discussion on Desired Option
This trick means stopping the discussion of an important issue in the speech that reflects the most desirable position. The surrounding people in this case are influenced by the already well-known “frame” effect, when the ideas of the last speech are able to more strongly form the necessary psychological attitude towards the perception of the necessary information.
1.7. Selective loyalty in observing the regulation
This is the case when some speakers are severely limited in the regulations, others are not.Limitations in the nature of statements are similar: some are forgiven for “harshness” towards the opponent, others are emphasized with remarks.
1.8. Making a decision pseudo de jure
This trick is used when people who do not have the right to vote are specially invited for a discussion, and during the discussion they ask the invitees what their opinion is on the problem under discussion. Then, focusing on the opinion of people who do not have a decisive vote, they make the necessary decision.
1.9. Discussion Break
The trick is to break the discussion at a key point in the discussion, when an extremely inconvenient and unacceptable solution can be worked out.
1.10. “Letting off steam” on insignificant issues
This is a model of discussion, when at first they deliberately discuss minor, secondary issues for a long time, and then, when many are tired of the discussion or are under the impression of any previous verbal and emotional “skirmish”, they bring it up for discussion the question that they want to discuss without intense criticism.
1.11. “Accidental” incomplete set of documents
This is a deliberately created situation when the participants in the discussion “as if by chance” are given an incomplete set of documents, and then along the way it turns out that someone (unfortunately) is not aware of all the available information.
This is the opposite version of the previous trick, which consists in the fact that a lot of projects of possible solutions are being prepared and it is simply physically impossible to compare them in a short time during the discussion.
1.13. “Loss” of documents
The trick is successful if working documents, letters, appeals, notes and everything else that can negatively affect the course of the discussion are lost “as if by accident”. There are other tricks of an organizational and procedural nature (“Ignoring the proposals received”, “Unexpected change of the discussion agenda”, etc.), which are aimed either at disrupting the discussion, or at reducing the discussion to mutual insults, etc. The ultimate goal of the data gimmicks, as shown above, is to reduce the discussion to options that are obviously unacceptable to opponents.
2. Psychological tricks
Psychological tricks are understood as such unacceptable (from the point of view of morality) methods of argument, discussion, polemics, which are based on psychological influence on the interlocutor in order to introduce him into a state of irritation, play on his feelings of pride, shame, to use the manifestations of other subtle features of the human psyche.
2.1. Irritation of the opponent
Removing him from the state of mental equilibrium by ridicule, accusations, reproaches and other means until the interlocutor is irritated and makes an erroneous statement unfavorable for his position.
2.2. Use of incomprehensible words and terms
This trick can, on the one hand, give the impression of the significance of the problem under discussion, the weight of the arguments presented, and a high level of professionalism and competence. On the other hand, the use by the initiator of the trick of incomprehensible, “pseudo-scientific” terms can cause an opposite reaction on the part of the opponent in the form of irritation, alienation or withdrawal into psychological defense. However, the trick succeeds when the interlocutor either hesitates to ask again about something, or pretends to understand what is being said and accept the arguments presented.
2.3. Dumbfounded by the pace of discussion
When communicating, a fast pace of speech is used and the opponent who perceives the arguments is not able to “process” them. In this case, the rapidly changing stream of thoughts simply overwhelms the interlocutor and introduces him into a state of discomfort.
2.4. Transferring the dispute to the sphere of conjectures
The essence of the trick is to transfer the polemics into the channel of denunciations and force the opponent to either justify himself or explain something that has nothing to do with the essence of the problem under discussion.An example of a trick is a statement like: “You say this because your position requires it, but in fact you think differently.”
2.5. Mind-reading for suspicion
The point of the trick is to divert all sorts of suspicions from yourself using the mind-reading option. As an example, we can give a judgment of the type: “Maybe you think that I am persuading you? So you are mistaken!”
2.6. Referring to “higher interests” without decoding them
The essence of the trick is to express an idea containing a hint that if the opponent, for example, continues to be intractable in the dispute, then this may affect the interests of those who are highly undesirable upset, or unbalance.An example of this trick, as a variant of the “cane argument”, can be an appeal like: “Do you understand what you are attempting when you do not agree with the arguments presented?”
2.7. Judgment like “This is trite!”
The main idea of the trick is to force the opponent to react to the unambiguous and unsubstantiated assessment, which does not really contain any arguments. It’s corny “quite predictable.Having heard such an assessment, few will resist the temptation to emotionally prove that this is not the case. To induce justification – this is the insidious design of the ruse.
2.8. Carthage must be destroyed
This is the name of the following psychological trick, the idea of which is to “accustom” the opponent to any thought. “Carthage must be destroyed” – this is how the speech in the Roman Senate of the Consul Cato the Elder ended every time. The trick is to gradually and purposefully accustom the interlocutor to some unsubstantiated statement.Then, after repeated repetition, this statement is declared obvious.
2.9. Understatement with a hint of special motives
The essence of this trick is to demonstrate some meaningful understatement, to hint that in this case there is much more to be said, but this is not done for any special reason.
2.10. Link to authority
As a reminder, this trick only “works” if the authority referred to is actually an authority.Otherwise, the trick can backfire. Interesting data are provided by experts in assessing who the interlocutor trusts most. In the first place, of course, is self-confidence. In second place is trust in a certain third party, moreover, an authoritative one. Finally, the one he least trusts is his opponent.
2.11. Accusation of utopian ideas
The trick is designed to force the partner to make excuses, to look for arguments against the accusation that his idea is unrealistic.Thanks to the arguments in defense of the proclaimed arguments, in fact, there is a departure from the main problem of the discussion. All this, as in many other cases, is extremely beneficial to the initiator of the trick.
2.12. Flattery or compliment
Flattering or complimentary turns of speech, in terms of the power of their effect on the human psyche, are not inferior to any other trick. This is primarily due to the fact that, acting on a person’s subconscious, they are capable of: pleasing the opponent’s ear, weakening criticism, create the much-needed atmosphere of recognition of human dignity.”We are all sensitive to compliments” – this is a perfectly fair thought, expressed at the time by A. Lincoln. But if a compliment can evoke pleasant feelings in the interlocutor, then flattery by its nature can provoke a backlash. What is the essential difference between these concepts – “flattery and” compliment “? Let’s dwell on this in more detail. Let’s start with a simple everyday example: in the phrase” How sweet and charming you are! ” would be straightforward, simple emphasis on the merits of a person.However, in a complimentary statement such as “It is clear why your husband is always in a hurry to go home” one can see a guess, a reflection on the merits of a woman, perhaps, and not only her appearance. So, the main differences between flattery and a compliment are that:
- flattery is straightforward, unambiguous, simple and understandable, while a compliment presupposes discrepancy, reflection, during which the person himself conjectures the essence of what has been said;
- the subject of flattery is people and their qualities, while the subject of a compliment is things, deeds, ideas, etc.that is, everything that, as it were, indirectly refers to people;
- Flattery implies an excessive exaggeration of the positive qualities of a person, attributing merits that are not there, while a compliment does not allow this, it only indirectly indicates the presence of a number of positive qualities in a person.
Be careful when you hear flattery,
Her weapon is evil and revenge,
Do not trust her ever.
No wonder people say:
Flattery has a very warm look,
Yes, a heart of ice.
2.13. False Shame
This trick is to use a false argument against the opponent, which he is able to “swallow” without much objection. The trick can be successfully applied in various kinds of judgments, discussions and disputes, including pedagogical ones.Appeals like “You, of course, know that science has now established …” or “Of course, you know that a decision was recently made …” or “You, of course, read about …” lead the opponent into a state “false shame”, when it is as though he is ashamed to say publicly about his ignorance of the things they are talking about. In these cases, most of the people against whom this trick is used nod or pretend to remember what it is about, thereby acknowledging all these, sometimes false, arguments.
2.14. False shame followed by a reproach
This trick, like many others, is aimed not at the essence of the problem being discussed, but at the personality of the interlocutor, with belittling the opponent, humiliating his dignity, etc. An example of a trick is the statement “How, you have not read this? ” or “How, you are not familiar with this data”, followed by the addition-reproach of the type: “So what then to talk to you about?” The subsequent actions of the initiator of the trick are obvious: he either ends the discussion (which, in fact, is included in his plans), or continues to skillfully divert away from the discussion of the problem.
2.15. Humiliation with irony
This technique is effective when the dispute is unprofitable for some reason. It is possible to disrupt the discussion of the problem, to get away from the discussion by belittling the opponent with irony like “Sorry, but you are saying things that are beyond my understanding.” Usually, in such cases, the one against whom this trick is directed begins to feel a feeling of dissatisfaction with what was expressed and, trying to soften his position, makes mistakes, but of a different nature.
2.16. Demonstrating resentment
This trick is also aimed at disrupting the argument, since a statement like “Who do you really take us for?” clearly demonstrates to the partner that the opposite side cannot continue the discussion, as it feels a sense of obvious dissatisfaction, and most importantly, resentment for some ill-considered actions on the part of the opponent.
2.17. Authority of the statement
This trick significantly increases the psychological significance of your own arguments.This can be done effectively through testimony of the type “I authoritatively declare to you.” Such a turn of speech by a partner is usually perceived as a clear signal of an increase in the significance of the arguments being expressed, and therefore, as a determination to firmly defend one’s position in a dispute.
2.18. The frankness of the statement
In this trick, the emphasis is on the special trust of communication, which is demonstrated with the help of phrases such as, for example, “I’ll tell you right now (frankly, honestly)… “. At the same time, it seems that everything that was said before was not fully direct, frank or clear. honest and straightforward
2.19 Double-entry bookkeeping
This trick is the most popular in almost all situations of business communication. extremely unacceptable when expressed by an opponent.This technique corresponds to the well-known principle of the so-called Hottentot morality (Hottentots are the ancient inhabitants of South Africa), according to which everything that corresponds to one’s own desires and views is considered true (true), and everything that contradicts them is considered false and incorrect.
2.20. Imaginary carelessness
The name of this trick actually already speaks of its essence: “they forget”, and sometimes they do not specifically notice the inconvenient and dangerous arguments of the opponent. Not to notice that which can harm – this is the purpose of the trick.
2.21. Apparent misunderstanding and misunderstanding
The “insidiousness” of this technique consists in misinterpreting the arguments and arguments of the opponent, that is, deliberately, for the sake of, of course, your interests, to present the partner’s argumentation in a distorted form. This is not difficult to do with well-known listening techniques such as listening-paraphrase and listening-summarizing. The essence of the first technique is to formulate the partner’s thoughts in your own words, but already deliberately distorting the information, using phrases such as “So, you believe… “,” In other words, you think … “,” In your opinion … “etc. The essence of the second technique is to give the interlocutor a signal that you have caught the whole message, and not some then part of it (what was beneficial or wanted to hear.) In other words, with the help of summarizing, that is, combining the partner’s thoughts into a single semantic field, using phrases such as: “Summarizing what you said …” , “So, as far as I understand, your main idea is that …”, you can deliberately change the meaning of the ideas expressed by your partner and thereby realize the main idea of the trick.
2.22. Flattering turns of speech
The peculiarity of this trick is to “sprinkle the sugar of flattery on the opponent,” hint to him how much he can win or, on the contrary, lose if he persists in his disagreement. An example of a flattering turn of speech is the statement: “As an intelligent person, you cannot help but see that …”.
2.23. It was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines
The name of this trick corresponds to the well-known old aphorism.Let us recall its essence. In past centuries, when planning a very important offensive military operation, incompetent “parquet” military leaders, it would seem, took everything into account: the time of day, and the nature of the maneuver, and the route of movement of the troops. However, the calculation was carried out exclusively on the map, without taking into account the binding to the terrain. In a real situation, the regiments had to move not on flat terrain and overcome all kinds of obstacles, in particular, ravines. As a result, the army was unable to reach the lines of attack on time and itself was attacked and subsequently defeated.And so it happened: “it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines.”
The use of this trick in a dispute, that is, the statement that everything the partner is talking about is good only in theory, but unacceptable in practice, will force him to use impromptu arguments to prove the opposite, which ultimately can heat up the atmosphere of discussion and reduce the discussion to mutual attacks and accusations.
2.24. Relying on a past statement
The main thing in this trick is to draw the opponent’s attention to his past statement, which contradicts his reasoning in this dispute, and to demand an explanation on this matter.Such clarifications can (if it is beneficial) lead the discussion to a dead end or provide information about the nature of the opponent’s changed views, which is also important for the initiator of the trick.
The main purpose of the ploy is to provoke a response to the expressed reproaches, accusations or insults. The natural human reaction to accusations like “You are a deceiver”, “You are a scoundrel”, “You are a scoundrel” is to respond in the same way, that is, to respond with a remark: “I hear the same from the same,” “You yourself are like that” and T.After the exchange of such “pleasantries”, of course, there is no need to talk about any confidential and constructive discussion.
2.26. Replacing Truth with Utility
This trick is based on an important and quite obvious rule: when the benefit is clearly visible, it is difficult to discern the truth. Thus, the purpose of the trick is to convince the disputant that he owes his well-being to the very thesis he is arguing against. To force the opponent to such thinking will help a statement like: “Haven’t you ever wondered what the implementation of your idea will cost?”
2.27. Linguistic cosmetics
The gimmick is that the same idea is expressed in different ways, giving it the desired shade. “Cosmetics” in this case can be different: from light, graceful, enveloping, like a thin veil, the subject of thought, to excessive, when the “second house”, where this thought enters, no longer has anything to do with the “first house”. As in the case with the use of a number of other tricks, this technique cannot be effectively applied without the methods of listening described below (“paraphrase” and “summarization”).
2.28. Visible support
The uniqueness of this trick lies in the fact that, taking the floor from the opponent, come to his aid, that is, begin to give new arguments and evidence in defense of his thesis. This help is necessary only for the appearance (semblance) of support of the enemy, because the purpose of the trick is to support the opponent’s imaginary support, aimed at calming him down with consent, diverting attention, and also weakening his psychological confrontation. After the enemy loses vigilance and those around them appreciate the level of awareness of the problem on the part of his opponent, the initiator of the ploy delivers a powerful counterattack, known to psychologists as the “Yes, but.”.. “, which reveals the shortcomings of the thesis put forward by the opponent, demonstrates its inferiority. Thus, it seems that the opposite side is familiar with the thesis being proved by the opponent more thoroughly than he himself, and after a careful study of the problem, she was convinced that this thesis and the entire system of argumentation were untenable,
2.29 Reducing the fact (argument) to personal opinion
The purpose of this trick is to accuse the communication partner of the fact that the arguments given by him in defense of his thesis or in refutation of the contested thought are nothing other than just a personal opinion, which, like the opinion of any other person, can be erroneous.Addressing the interlocutor with the words “What you are now saying is just your personal opinion” will involuntarily tune him to the tone of objections, generate a desire to challenge the expressed opinion about the arguments given by him. If the interlocutor succumbs to this trick, the subject of controversy, contrary to his will and in favor of the plan of the initiator of the trick, is shifted towards the discussion of a completely different problem, where the opponent will prove that the arguments expressed by him are not only his personal opinion.Practice confirms that if this happened, then the trick was a success.
2.30. Selection of acceptable arguments
This trick is based on deliberate selection of one-sided information to prove any thought and operating in the course of discussion or dispute only with this information.
This technique means deliberately distorting the meaning of the opponent’s statements, presenting them as funny and strange.For example, a remark like “Your colleague has agreed that …” makes the perceiver react in a special way to this information. In other words, any influence of slavery introduces the interlocutor into a state of a far from constructive attitude when discussing the problem, which, in turn, can cause an extremely negative defensive reaction in the form of indignation, accusation, or refusal to discuss.
2.32. Trojan Horse
The essence of the trick is as follows:
- the disputant, using the already known method of “visible support”, goes over to the opponent’s side in the dispute and begins to give additional arguments in defense of his opponent’s thesis;
- being “accepted on the side of the opponent” (since the opposite side is flattering to listen to the statements of opponents in defense of their own position), using a trick skillfully distorts the main thesis and arguments of the partner beyond recognition;
- then he begins to ardently defend this already distorted position, which has nothing to do with the original.As a result, when the author of a compromised thesis realizes, it is already too late, since the adversary managed to inflict a “fatal blow” on both the thesis and the author’s authority.
This method is especially effective after using the “visible support” technique, but only half implemented, that is, when, having gone over to the opponent’s side, the initiator of the trick notes only the positive, positive aspects of the proposal (thesis) expressed by his partner.Then, introducing the rule “like generates like” invites the interlocutor to speak about the positive aspects of his own judgment. The adversary usually does this without much difficulty, since he has just received a speech of eulogy for his proposal. Having skillfully achieved similar responses from his opponent, the trick begins to successfully manipulate the opponent’s arguments just given about the advantages and benefits of his project. The main thing at this final stage is, first, to keep the partner’s attention on the positive that he himself found in the arguments of his opponent until the end of the discussion; secondly, to prevent the opposite side from turning the discussion in the direction of discussing the positive aspects of their ideas and proposals.
The desire to deliberately withhold information from the interlocutor is the most frequently used trick in any form of discussion. In a rivalry with a business partner, it is much easier to simply hide information than to challenge it in polemics. The ability to competently hide something from your opponent is the most important component of the art of diplomacy. In this regard, we note that the professionalism of a polemicist is precisely what is to skillfully evade the truth, without resorting to lies.
This could mean a mixture of lies and truthful information; one-sided coverage of facts; imprecise and vague wording of the discussed provisions; links to sources with a proviso like: “I don’t remember who said …”; distortion of a reliable statement with the help of: value judgments, etc. The reception of half-truths is most often, as practice shows, used when it is necessary to avoid an unwanted turn of the dispute, when there are no reliable arguments, but it is imperative to challenge the opponent when it is necessary, contrary to common sense, to persuade someone to a certain conclusion.
This technique, as you know, aims to hide the real state of affairs and convey false information to your partner, which can be presented in the form of false documents, links to sources, to experiments that no one has ever conducted, etc. In real life, perhaps, there is no person who has not lied at least once. Let’s not forget that in everyday business communication, each person is as truthful as he is smart.
2.37. The carrot and stick method
The idea of this trick is manifested in the problem-rhetorical questions asked to the opponent such as: “What is better for you to have: your own opinion, or everything else?”, “What is more preferable for you – to object or not to suffer?” In other words, the threatening nature of this trick forces the adversary to make a choice: remain principled, but suffer, or accept conditions, sometimes unacceptable, but at the same time be safe from threats, blackmail, and sometimes physical violence.The special meaning of this trick, impermissible from the point of view of morality, can be demonstrated with an interesting example from the famous novel by M. Puzo “The Godfather”, where one of the heroes of the novel frankly shares the idea that a kind word and a pistol can do much more than just a kind word.
2.38. Coercion to a strictly unambiguous answer
The main thing in this trick is to firmly and decisively demand from the opponent to give an unambiguous answer: “Say directly:” yes “or” no “, i.e.That is, deliberately force him not to a dialectical answer (“and … and”), but to an alternative (“or … or”). Experience confirms that this trick is usually resorted to when the opponent’s detailed response is highly undesirable. It should be noted that the trick is most effective in dealing with a poorly educated opponent, since in most cases it will be perceived as a manifestation of adherence to principles on the part of the partner.
2.39. What do you have against?
The essence of the technique is not to prove your stated thesis, i.e.That is, not to give arguments and arguments in its defense, but to propose (even demand) to refute it: “And what, in fact, do you have against?” In the event that the opponent falls for a trick, he begins to criticize the position that has been put forward, and the argument (as planned by the initiator of the trick) begins to be conducted with respect to the opponent’s counter-arguments already cited. Thus, the one using the trick deliberately avoids proving his own thesis and concentrates general attention on the opponent’s counter-arguments.
2.40. Multiple question
This trick consists in asking your opponent not one, but several, different and little compatible questions in one question. Then they proceed depending on the answers: either they are accused of not understanding the essence of the problem, or they are accused of the fact that the opponent did not fully answer the questions, misled or avoided answering.
3. Logical tricks
This group of tricks is built on deliberate violations of the laws and rules of formal logic, or vice versa, on their skillful use in order to manipulate an insufficiently informed opponent.Those who use these tricks, as A. Herzen aptly noted in his time, “do not like to enter the open field of logic, realizing that they will be defeated.” The main tricks of this group are as follows.
3.1. Uncertainty of thesis
The essence of the trick is to vaguely and indefinitely formulate your main thesis, this will allow the initiator of the trick to interpret the expressed thought in different ways. This technique is based on violation of the most important law of formal logic – the law of identity.The wording and comments on it will be given in the next section of the manual.
3.2. Failure to comply with the law of sufficient reason
This is the case when the arguments, judgments, arguments are correct, but not sufficient. The formal-logical law of sufficient reason can be formulated as follows: any true thought must be sufficiently substantiated by arguments, and not only correctly constructed according to the laws of identity, the excluded third and consistency. The trick is to violate the rules of arguments such as validity, sufficiency, and consistency.More details about their characteristics will be given in the next section of the manual.
3.3. Vicious circle in proof
This trick is designed to prove the idea with the help of itself, only said in other words, this is the “vicious circle” in the system of proof.
3.4. Causal syllogism
The peculiarity of this trick is that the reasoning is deliberately based on a logical error: “after this, it means because of this.” This sophism was known in antiquity.Its essence lies in the fact that the temporary connection between phenomena is deliberately replaced by a causal one.
3.5. Incomplete rebuttal
The idea of the trick is to:
- choose the most vulnerable from the stated system of the opponent’s arguments;
- smash it sharply;
- to pretend that all other arguments do not even deserve attention.
3.6. Inappropriate analogies
A characteristic feature of this trick is to use analogies in the proof that are absolutely incommensurate with the ones under consideration. Let’s demonstrate this with a few examples. The first example is the famous story of Plutarch about how one famous Roman, divorcing his wife, after listening to the reproaches of his friends, who kept repeating to him: “Why are you doing this? Is she not chaste? Or is she not pretty? Or is she barren?” , put forward his foot, shod with a shoe, and asked: “Isn’t he good? Or is he worn out? But who of you knows where he shakes my leg?”The second example can be taken from contemporary Russian politics, when democracy in Russia is compared to a girl and then asked: “Can you ask too much of a girl when she is still so young?” A third example of the inappropriateness of analogies can be a comparison of the activities of our domestic parliament with a boat: “As soon as the deputies start to rake with a” left “paddle, the whole parliament begins to turn” to the right “and vice versa.” Obviously, in the last two examples, the illegitimacy of analogies is evident, since in one case the process of democratization is compared with the process of development of the female body, in the other, the activities of parliament are likened to the actions of the physical laws of nature.
The author, unfortunately, is unknown to me. I scanned it from some book about 10 years ago, no details have survived.
Harry Houdini’s Biography | 1xmatch
biography • Perfume and chains
Erich Weiss is the name of Harry Houdini, one of the greatest illusionists of all time – was born on March 24, 1874 in Budapest (Hungary).
Among the many magicians who were interested in spiritualism and would help uncover its tricks, the most famous is undoubtedly he, Houdini, whose name is synonymous with magic.
At the age of four, he and his family moved to the United States: this time the spelling of the names was changed to make it easier to read Anglo-Saxon, so little Erich Weiss was called Eric Weiss. The family first settles in Appleton, Wisconsin, where Mayer’s father Samuel Weiss serves as a rabbi in the local Reformed Jewish community. Then in 1887 Mayer moved to New York with only little Eric; here they live in a guesthouse on 79th Street until the family can reunite in permanent housing.
Eric became a professional illusionist in 1891: he chose the stage name Harry Houdini as a tribute to the French magician Jean Eugene Robert-Houdin. Two years later, he manages to make Harry Houdini his official name.
In 1893 he met Wilhelmina Beatrice Rahner (aka Bess), the illusionist with whom Houdini falls in love. After three weeks of courtship, bride: Bess will be his personal assistant on stage for the rest of her career.
Houdini originally studied card games and traditional illusionist arts, claiming to be the “king of cards.”The big break came in 1899 when she met the showman Martin Beck. Beck is impressed with the act in which Houdini frees himself from a pair of handcuffs, so much so that he advises him to focus on studying this type of number, inserting his shows into the entertainment show chain. For several months, Houdini performed in the most famous theaters in the United States, and in 1900 he was invited to perform in Europe.
After four years, he returns to the United States. And his name is already a legend.
He performed throughout the United States until the 1920s, demonstrating his exceptional ability to get rid of handcuffs, chains, ropes and straitjackets, often hanging from a rope, submerged in water, or in public view.
Its most famous number is perhaps the Chinese Water Torture Chamber, presented since 1913, a room in which Houdini hangs upside down in a glass and steel box filled with water and locked with a key.
Also in the 1920s, he published several books in which he reveals his tricks: many locks and many handcuffs, – he explains, – can only be opened by applying sufficient force to them in a certain way, others can be opened with ropes. shoes. On other occasions, Houdini used specially hidden keys or sticks.He was able to escape from a water-filled milk cask whose cap was tied to the collar he was wearing because the collar could be detached from the inside. When tied with ropes or a straitjacket, he could create room for himself to move by first straightening his shoulders and chest, then simply lifting his arms from his body, and then spreading his shoulders.
His straitjacket number was originally performed behind a curtain from which the magician jumped out again; then Houdini would have realized that without the curtain, the public would have been more fascinated by his personal struggle for liberation.
Although it was not easy, all of Houdini’s shows – including breakout numbers – were also performed by his brother Theo Weiss, aka Hardin. The big difference between the two was the number of straitjackets: Houdini severed both shoulders to get out of it, Hardin was able to sever only one.
After the death of his mother, to whom he was very attached, in the 20s he became interested in spiritualism, turning to various mediums to try to contact her. Soon after discovering that those who were supposed to help him were actually trying to deceive him, Houdini launched a veritable violent crusade against spiritualism, so much so that in a few years he would make a decisive contribution to the decline and discredit of the movement.
Houdini used to travel to cities where he had to arrange concerts in a day or two; After changing his clothes, he visited the most famous mediums of the city and asked to contact relatives who had never been. When mediums began to reveal details about these supposed relatives, Houdini recorded them as charlatans. Then, on the evening of the show, Houdini talked about his visits to the city’s mediums and detailed the fraud in which he was the victim.
Houdini will also serve on Scientific American’s Paranormal Investigation Committee (one of the oldest and most prestigious scientific publications), a position that will enable him to research a variety of mediums (including Nino Pecoraro, Margery and George Valiantin).: he will reveal several tricks used to imitate spiritual phenomena.
For several years Houdini became friends with the Scotsman Arthur Conan Doyle; the wife of the latter begins to claim that she received a message from Houdini’s mother: the message would be in English, and the mother spoke only Hungarian; there were references to Catholicism when she was Jewish; finally, the message did not contain details that only the son could know. After this episode, the friendship between them ends. Conan Doyle is deeply offended, but Houdini writes about him: “ he is a good man, very intelligent, but manic when it comes to spiritualism.Not being initiated into the world of secrets, never learning the tricks of witchcraft, gaining his trust and deceiving him was the easiest thing in the world for anyone. “.
After a ruptured appendix, Harry Houdini died of peritonitis at the age of 52 on October 31, 1926, on Halloween night.
Two weeks earlier, he received a heavy blow to the stomach from a boxing student at McGill University in Montreal. The latter visited him in the dressing room to check on his legendary abs; Houdini usually allowed this approach, but this time he was caught off guard by the boy’s fist and did not have time to prepare for the blow.
Later it turned out that not only the blow caused the death of the illusionist.
After the funeral (held on November 4 in New York), which was attended by more than two thousand people, Houdini’s body is buried next to the body of his beloved mother in the Machpelah Cemetery in Queens: the symbol of the Society of American Magicians is carved on it. stone.
Houdini disappears, leaving a personal spear in favor of opponents of spiritualism: shortly before his death, he makes a pact with his wife Bess, telling her that, if possible, he would contact her from the afterlife using a coded message agreed between them two.alone. Every Halloween night for the next ten years, Bess held a seance to test the agreement. After another unsuccessful rooftop session at the Knickerbocker Hotel in Los Angeles in 1936, Bess blows out the candle that burned next to a photograph of Houdini after his death.
Since then, many mediums have claimed to have received messages from Houdini, but none have provided the slightest proof that this is true. Every year on the anniversary of his death, the Society of American Wizards holds a memorial service for Harry Houdini, which includes a seance to try to summon his spirit.
Quotes by Harry Houdini
Fire has always been and will always be the most terrible of the elements.
As far as I know, I am the only artist whose assistants have ever sworn an oath of secrecy, honor and an oath of fidelity by a notary deed.
The betrayal of trusted servants is one of the most demoralizing things that can happen to an artist.
If there is a way back, I will find it.
My brain is the key that sets me free.
If I only remembered what comes after the abra, I would make the entire audience disappear.
Visit the whole site Aforismi.meglio.it phrases Harry Houdini
Photos and images of Harry Houdini
No posts or comments for Harry Houdini .
Related Topics & Biographies
Codes Rope Arthur Conan Doyle Halloween Boxing Mixed Science Harry Houdini in Literature, English Books, Movies and DVDs Harry Houdini
Born on the same day as Harry Houdini
“This is a landmark event”: The IOC has changed the Olympic motto
Now it will sound: “Faster, higher, stronger – together.”The new motto will be in effect at the Olympic Games in Tokyo, which will begin on July 23Photo: Kim Kyung-Hoon / Reuters
Updated at 16:20
The International Olympic Committee for the first time in history has changed the Olympic motto “Faster, Higher, Stronger” … The word “together” was added to it, reports Reuters. “This is a landmark event,” – said the head of the IOC Thomas Bach. In April, it was he who put forward the idea to change the motto of the competition. The original Faster, Higher, Stronger version was approved by the first Olympic Congress in 1894 and has remained unchanged to this day.The world champion in athletics, sports commentator Yolanda Chen shares her opinion:
Yolanda Chen world champion in athletics, sports commentator
The motto is changed for this Olympics, which will begin on July 23 in Tokyo.
For the future, the IOC has announced the sports that will be considered Olympic. Sambo was the first of the Russian types to receive permanent recognition of the International Olympic Committee, RIA Novosti reports. In the mid-1970s, SAMBO was approaching inclusion in the Summer Olympics program.But as a result of political difficulties caused by the boycott of the 1980 Olympics, SAMBO was demoted in international status to a demonstration sport, and then this status was canceled by the IOC. Sambo received its first temporary recognition in 2018, says Elena Lomakina, Executive Director of the Association “Student Sports League of Sambo”:
Elena Lomakina Executive Director of the Association “Student Sports League of Sambo”
…For example, at the 2020 World Championships, Russian sambo wrestlers won 17 gold medals, 4 silver and 4 bronze medals.
President of the International Sambo Federation Vasily Shestakov called the inclusion of this sport in the Olympic list a great victory. According to him, they went to this with the whole team for 11 years – as long as he is at the head of the federation.
In addition to sambo, several other international federations have received official recognition: lacrosse is a game with a rubber ball and a stick with a long handle, kickboxing, muay thai, cheerleading and ice stock.The latter is something like curling, but a stick is attached to the sliding surface.
Lacrosse and eisstock are not very popular in Russia. But recognition by the IOC does not guarantee that these disciplines will qualify for the Olympiad, says Sport-Express observer Dmitry Kuznetsov:
Dmitry Kuznetsov Sport-Express columnist
But these are possible plans for future Olympiads. As for the nearest one, which starts on July 23, there is no hot water in the rooms of Russian fencers in the Olympic Village at the Tokyo Games.To take a shower, the head coach of the team, Ilgar Mammadov, had to use a screwdriver. “Wires run through all the rooms, one socket, and that one is on the opposite wall,” Mammadov told TASS. The IOC responded to this that the athletes are satisfied with the living conditions in the Japanese Olympic Village.
Add BFM.ru to your news sources?
Playing with your mind TextGeorge Carlin Live: Playing with your mind Text To main
George Carlin: Playin ‘with Your Head text
George Carlin: George Carlin: Playin’ with Your Head text
This night began like any other.
I was in a good mood.
I finally finished the big job
and I was confident in it.
It looked solid, without any loopholes
But I wasn’t overly confident either.
I’ve been through all this.
Yes, he is on vacation
and asked me to work for him
while he is gone.
And you are the famous Mike Holder, right?
I’ve heard a lot about you.
Are you working on something new?
You’re too curious, aren’t you?
You’re 90 cents, Mr. Holder.
This guy is suspicious.
Where has Billy gone?
Mexico is too expensive for him.
And my cookies all crumbled.
There is definitely something wrong here.
Good evening, Mr. Holder.
Billy, I thought you went to Mexico.
You better get out of here.
What happened, Mr. Holder?
I think it’s not safe here.
Yes, I know.
Be careful too.
See you later.
Stay out of the house.
I knew something was wrong here.
Who was this courier?
Who is he behind?
You said he didn’t suspect anything.
Take the envelope!
Are you an idiot?
Into the car!
Into the car!
You saw how he drove through the pothole,
couldn’t you slow down?
Why don’t you put shock absorbers on this car?
He’s slowing down.
Wait, he … Just knock him out of the way.
He’s got some kind of problem with the car.
Let me out.
How do you do, Mr. Holder?
Hey Holder, wait!
Gentlemen, you can’t come here.
Haven’t seen each other for a long time.
Look, before you make
big, big mistake
, just give us the envelope.
Come on, we’re old friends, remember?
Plus, you don’t want to fool yourself
, do you?
Well, what do you say?
Give us an envelope.
And we’ll go have a drink with you.
And let’s talk about the old days.
Come on, give us the envelope.
All this bickering is so exhausting.
You didn’t understand anything, did you?
It’s over for you guys.
Plus, you don’t know what to do about it.
You’re making a big mistake, baby.
You just watch.
He will do it.
He will not do Nichrome.
Hey, hello, hello everyone.
Thank you all.
How are you?
Hello, hello, hello … how are you feeling?
Thank you, thank you.
Okay, I appreciate that.
Hey, hello, hello, how are you?
How are you?
How are you?
How’s it going?
How’s yours nothing?
What are you thinking about?
What have you heard about?
What did you talk about?
What do you feel?
How is it in general?
What’s going on with you?
Ke pass? How about life in general? How are you?
We have so many ways to say hello.
There are many greetings.
Do you know which one is my favorite?
How is your piston working?
Nice greeting, isn’t it?
True, not very suitable for women,
except that if you are talking with a woman – auto mechanic
then it is normal.
I have always wanted to give this kind of greetings to
How does your piston work? “
There hasn’t been a chance yet.
There is one way to greet
which I don’t like at all,
which I don’t like.
This is when people tell you
want to give me extra work
They tell me “Are you being overloaded?”
And it looks like it keeps them from me for about half an hour
We also have many ways to say “bye”.
That only we do not say goodbye.
We say bye bye, happy, see you,
good luck, goodbye, packedova.
Do you know which is my favorite?
Some people need life advice, you know.
And some guy says “Good day” to you
I say, “Hey, I already have a good one.
Now I’m looking for a long one.”
And it looks like that keeps them from me for about half an hour.
We also use foreign phrases
to say goodbye.
Some people, when they leave you
, they want to be original
and they kill you on the spot with their “Arrivederchi”.
or the American version of the latter,
Go “Aloha”, the lovely word, “Aloha”.
They say it in Hawaii, of course
and it means both “hello” and “goodbye”,
which is very appropriate,
because if you are overheated in the sun
you do not know whether you are good or bad.
Have you noticed this?
Sometimes you get used to the
phrase that you say goodbye to.
Have you ever found yourself in a situation where you use the same phrase
over and over again with every person
and you feel a little silly?
For example, you leave a party and you need to
say goodbye to five or six people in a row
and you say, “Come on, happy!
Come on, happy!
Come on, happily!
Come on, happily!
Come on, happy!
And you feel like a complete idiot.
Do you know what I do?
Every month I change my goodbye phrase.
Whether I need it or not,
Every month I start using a different phrase.
People like it.
They notice This is a change.
They tell me: “Sorry,
but don’t you usually say goodbye with the words’ Come on, happy?”
I say, “Yes, but now no”
Now I say, “Good luck!
Good luck and see you soon.
Peace and quiet to you.
Let the forces of evil
not find their way to your home. “
A strong phrase, right?
People will remember you if you say so.
Or you can sometimes combine several ways
goodbye that do not go well with each other, for example :
and don’t get caught with a wooden five-centner. ”
People won’t have a clue
what the fuck you’re talking about.
Or you can say goodbye in a realistic manner.
Some people need life advice.
And here is the situation that you go through very often.
Have you noticed that when you leave someone,
very often they give you a message,
to pass it on to someone else?
For example, they say, “Give Klaus my love.
Tell Klaus that Rebecca is sending him love.”
Does this suit you?
Are you satisfied that you are being used this way?
Are you satisfied with the big responsibility
of transferring Rebecca’s love to Klaus?
Suppose you haven’t met Klaus,
then what do you do with Rebecca’s love,
drag her with you all the time?
Give it to someone else, maybe.
here’s some Rebecca’s love for you. “
Suppose Wilhelm doesn’t know Rebecca.
Is it legal for him to take her love?
Especially if it was originally intended for Klaus.
Suppose you gave Wilhelm Rebecca’s love for Klaus
and then you met Klaus,
What will you give him back then?
All Rebecca’s love
you gave to Wilhelm.
Can you ask Wilhelm
to give Rebecca back to Klaus?
Maybe he’s already used to her
Can Klaus sue Wilhelm ?
Can Wilhelm be arrested?
Can you be arrested
for transporting love across state lines?
Let’s get Wilhelm out of this situation for simplicity.
Suppose Rebecca gave you her love
to pass it on to Klaus,
and you met Klaus,
how would you express this love?
Do you dare to kiss Klaus with his tongue?
Which brings us to another problem:
may be Klaus is gay.
Klaus doesn’t want Rebecca’s love
Klaus wants Wilhelm’s love.
If Klaus asks you to convey your love to Wilhelm,
say: “Fuck you, Klaus.
Give your love to Wilhelm yourself.
And I’ll go look for Rebecca.”
And a little more on this subject,
sometimes people want you to hug and kiss someone for them
Now you have to carry a heavy load.
Hug and kiss them for me.”
These are usually women.
I noticed that women are more expressive at such moments
and sometimes they are quite outspoken.
Be careful driving
and give Jake a good blowjob for me. “
Why don’t you ask Klaus
to do it for you?
No matter how much we greet each other
I am delighted to welcome you here.
[From the audience] Hello George!
Hello my friend.
I would also like to greet some of the
societies who came to watch the show today.
Perhaps you can let us know where you are sitting.
Child Pornographers Association.
God bless you, you are doing a great job.
Syphilis Victims Union,
basically the same people.
America’s Concerned and Wicked Dicks.
This is a proud organization
and we always have a meeting when I’m in town.
Women Who Sleep With Everyone,
not as many as I hoped.
Those girls who haven’t burnt themselves right now, don’t forget
casting party after the show.
Now I would also like to greet
of those people who have come today
from some special houses.
I mean those places
some of us, let’s be honest, need to be imprisoned.
A home for those
who no longer feel special,
a home for those
who felt normal about a year ago
and a home for those who give a shit,
what happened until yesterday morning.
among us today are also
people from the Center of Visually Repulsive.
Try not to look at these people
unless you are wearing safety glasses.
The reason I mentioned these groups,
the only reason I mentioned these groups,
is because I have been helping these charities
I prefer to list charities
associated with me,
at the very beginning of the show.
As you know, a lot of entertainers,
a lot of people in show business
want you to know how great they are.
And I am no exception in this regard,
but, unfortunately for me,
most charitable organizations
have already been advertised by others.
In fact, between Danny Thomas and Jerry Lewis (American comedians)
roughly 80% of the ailments
that make you lame and shiver are already taken.
And this means
that most of the normal diseases are no longer available to me.
So I have to deal
with smaller organizations
like Fleet Rescue.
This is a real challenge.
It’s not easy to get people to join an organization
knowing that no one wants to sit in dinghy
with a drum between their knees.
While we are still talking about public services,
I would like to mention
about a problem that exists in our country,
that no one wants to talk about openly,
but I think it’s time to face the truth.
It happens in many families,
but many people don’t want to admit it,
and I’m talking about
Plants are treated cruelly and ruthlessly.
This is impossible to take positively,
but plant abuse is part of a global problem
of a global problem
called “abuse syndrome”.
And we heard a lot about wife abuse
and a lot of work was done in this direction
but then we started hearing about
cases of husband abuse too.
Yes, husband abuse.
Apparently, this happens
when the woman is very large,
the man is very tiny
and they both drink a liter of whiskey a day.
Then you heard about other family members,
who were abused,
in general, the very idea
of distant relatives abuse
surprises me a little.
Get on the bus and drive for 6-7 hours
just to beat up someone 90,067 whom you barely know.
But the problem continues to spread,
best friend abuse,
which, I think, indicates the uncontrollable temper of the beater.
And blind date abuse,
which is often, as many of you know,
But the problem gets even more frustrating
and even a little weird
when we start hearing about pet abuse.
Animal cruelty, yes, I had the same feelings.
When I first heard about this, I could not believe it.
I asked myself: “What?”
And I said, “Well, yes,
is exactly that, according to the information.”
I often have
such conversations with myself.
I love good conversations so much.
But it’s true, pets are abused.
This happens when a person has a hard day at work,
he comes home and how should give pussy to Fuzzy.
But then the scale of the problem just gets gross.
Then the problem, I really don’t know what to say.
We heard about plant abuse.
Plant abuse, I couldn’t believe it.
I asked myself: “What?”
And I said, “Well …”
Because this time I just had no words.
But it’s true, plants are being abused.
I don’t mean just physical treatment.
I’m not just talking about
physical injuries to plants.
I do not mean how to kick the zinnia
a meter forward.
I’m not talking about
shoot a gardenia with a pistol.
I’m not even talking about stopping the car,
go out and piss on the bush.
I’m talking about psychological torment.
Psychological agonies that plants go through because of us
For example, hanging plants.
How do we know
that they are not scared to shit there?
No wonder ivy clings.
You would also cling to the wall of the building.
So when you get home, please
look around your house,
make sure you don’t put plant
in a place it doesn’t want to stand.
And for God’s sake, never,
, never put a plant in a bathroom.
They hate this.
Now, ladies and gentlemen,
before we start
the humorous part of our show,
I would like us to honor
a minute of silence to
Bolivian city volleyball fans
who left this world this morning
due to an accident roller coaster
in the vicinity of Lapaz, Bolivia.
They probably got out of their seats at bend
through the cool, fresh morning Lapaz air,
and, being heavier than air,
landed in the panic room.
So I thought it would be good for us today,
as I said, to commemorate a minute of silence to
Bolivian city volleyball fans
off the fucking rollercoaster
right into the fucking panic room.
And if you thought it was a laughing moment,
time to joke,
time to nudge your neighbor in the ribs,
I will ask you to introduce yourself to
in the place of the Bolivians.
That is, imagine yourself in your place.
And place your place for a moment in Bolivia.
Imagine visiting Bolivia,
and come to see Bolivian comedian
in the Bolivian theater,
and he says that mentally handicapped
American volleyball fans
were thrown out of roller coaster
and he wants to honor their memory with a minute of silence,
and you are sitting next to some Bolivian nerd
who giggles through his nose
do you think you will get mad?
I think you will definitely get angry.
So, ladies and gentlemen, let us bear in mind the
feelings of the multitude of Bolivians
in this room today
and let us contain this very natural urge
to giggle a little when another person has died.
And let’s all together honor the memory of a minute of silence
Bolivian city 90,067 volleyball fans.
Not to mention
of the poor unsuspecting motherfuckers in the fear room.
I look, we are not doing very well.
But that’s okay, that’s okay,
because I also don’t know what to do
during a minute of silence.
I don’t know what to do
during a minute of silence.
What are you doing in a moment of silence?
What do they want?
What do they expect from me?
Do they want me to pray?
They don’t say that.
If they want me to pray, fuck it, they have to ask.
I’m going to pray, but damn it, you have to ask me.
They don’t ask for it,
they don’t give any instructions.
You go to a baseball game,
you come to a football stadium and they announce:
ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen,
ladies and gentlemen, we ask you, we ask you,
we ask you, we ask you, we ask you, we ask you,
we ask you, minute, minute, minute, minute,
minute, minute, minute, silence, silence,
silence, silence, silence, silence.”
I don’t know what to do.
Sometimes I have evil thoughts.
I usually go to the point of counting pimples
on the neck of the man in front of me.
I am looking for pimples with a white head
and hair growing through it.
Or sometimes I find myself staring
at the huge, but perfectly shaped breasts
of the woman in the front row.
Gently rising and falling
in the light of the October day sun
and my thoughts become slightly romantic:
You look at these buffers!
Fuck your mother, what a buffer!
Buffer City, USA! ”
I’m going to go down to buffet
and buy myself a sausage
and hide it in my pants.
Then, in the middle of game
, I quickly grab the sausage out of my pants.
Then I will eat sausage
and make her look at me.
she probably won’t understand.
This is my way of asking out on a date.
Your imagination works to the fullest.
I don’t know what to do during the moment of silence.
And why exactly “silence”?
Why do they need silence?
I mean, anyway, the person, no matter how honored him, is already dead.
How can silence help?
The guy won’t get up anyway.
How about a minute of screaming?
Wouldn’t that be more appropriate for a dead man?
Plus, it tunes in the right mood before playing.
And why are they dead all the time?
What are these honors for the dead?
Fuck the dead!
What about the wounded?
What about the wounded? 90,067 There are always more wounded, 90,067 than the number of deaths in any good disaster.
How about a minute of talking through your teeth
for those who have been cured and released?
I always wanted to be cured and released.
But usually I get cured and arrested.
But this is personal.
These are personal items.
I’m not being honest about everything.
I’m not the type to talk about …
But I’ll tell you something
About my personal life,
something you don’t know.
I never fucked ten
but I fucked five times two one night.
And it seems to me that it counts.
It seems to me that this could be included in your
profile as a positive achievement.
Never fucked one.
Hey, I’ve never been so drunk as to fuck just one.
Damn, you have to be really drunk to fuck just one.
Because some guys will fuck anyone, you know.
Some guys will fuck anyone.
Some guys will fuck anyone.
But not me, now no.
Not now that herpes and AIDS are everywhere.
Just in case
Now I don’t even jerk off anymore.
But I don’t know where fate will take me.
And you know,
sometimes I think
and I think what a terrible life it must be.
What a curse to be bisexual.
Can you imagine
wanting to fuck any person you meet?
Consider how many phone numbers you will need to store.
You will have to walk
with the telephone directory under your arm.
And you know,
I always wanted to work in the grocery store
so that one day a woman
would come up to me and ask me to wrap her tongue (= kiss with tongue, pun).
And I will tell her:
And she will answer: “I don’t finish at all,
so I’m looking for a language.”(pun)
But so far I haven’t had that opportunity.
Time to refuel.
Sometimes I do that.
But then I stop.
It was one of those
The next part of speech
I would like to devote to what every person goes through,
it is about the loss of things
I don’t like to lose anything.
I don’t like to lose anything!
Because : where is it?
Basically this is the question
that worries me the most.
I’m a practical guy: where is it?
I just had it.
Do you recognize this feeling?
It was just here!
Shall we go around again?
Where do the things we lose go?
There are things that I don’t even really want to find
I just want to know where the fuck they went.
And the loss of things is one of those situations in life,
which is even more difficult in childhood.
It is even worse to lose something
when you are a child
because people will reproach you for it.
This is a double misfortune.
Not only is the thing missing,
so you still have to endure all the crap from above.
if I knew that
I would not have lost my yo-yo.
It always struck me.
It couldn’t just get up and go.
I lost a cat once.
She just got up and left.
And she really starts to say:
Where do the things we lose go?
Do you know what I think?
I think there is a huge bunch of stuff somewhere.
A huge, constantly changing
pile of lost items.
You lose something
and it ends up in this heap.
And then you say, “Oh, there it is.”
And it immediately came back from the heap.
And you don’t even know about the existence of the heap.
And where is this heap?
In paradise, of course.
Must be in paradise.
This is the first thing that happens
when you get to heaven –
they give you everything that you have ever lost.
This is the whole point of paradise.
Everything is returned to you.
and here are the sports briefs we found
on the Golden State Freeway.
Donkey hoof marks
and chocolate splashes on them.
Looks like it was a fun party.
Yes, everything will be returned to you.
You will be returned absolutely … well, not absolutely everything.
You will not get back global things.
You won’t get your sanity back,
your tonsils, your appendix,
they’ll keep it for the show.
Virginity, you also will not get back
because you were in such a hurry to get rid of it
But all your wallets will be returned to you.
Your lost wallets will be returned to you.
But without money, everything is like on Earth.
They take their money as donations to the church.
Speaking of paradise,
do you know what else they have in paradise?
They have a special room
for all the balloons that ever flew.
Yes, next time you see a balloon
flying away from you into the sky, relax,
will soon be with his friends
in the balloon room,
near the main building
in Western Paradise
and it does me happy.
Do you know why?
Because I love balloons.
I’m not ashamed to say it openly.
I love balloons.
I love them.
Do you know what I’m talking about?
I say: “Give me a ball”
Sometimes I say louder: “Give me a ball!”
But most people don’t pay any attention to me.
Let’s get back to lost things.
Have you noticed that some people,
when they lose something,
immediately say that it was stolen?
This is their first reaction.
It is their ego that is defending itself.
They cannot accept the fact,
, that they can be so dumb,
, to lose something.
Someone must have stolen it.
Even if it is something,
that absolutely nobody needs it.
Who Stole My Used Bandage Collection?
They also disappeared with
of my nude photograph of Ernest Borgain (American actor)
Did you notice the following
when you lost something?
That the longer you search,
the stranger the places you search.
You are looking in very strange places
after a while.
But you have no choice, why?
Because you’ve already looked in the obvious places.
You are looking there at first,
in obvious places.
People say to each other:
The fucking thing hasn’t been found yet, has it? ”
I’ll look in the oven and you check the cesspool.
You look in strange places.
Have you ever looked in the freezer for your car keys?
You have no choice, why?
You won’t miss
such obvious places as the freezer, right?
You imagine them in it.
You can already see them in it.
That’s what imagination is for,
imagine where you left your car keys.
You believe it, and you are imaginatively repeating the
path from the supermarket.
And I had frozen banana guacamole in my hands.
I came home, got out of the car
with banana guacamole in hand,
U held the keys in this hand,
I put banana guacamole in the freezer,
and probably left the keys there too,
need to look.
Oh shit, they’re not there.
I swore that I left these keys in the freezer.
who stole the banana guacomole? “
You are looking in very strange places.
Have you ever found yourself poking around
in a suit that you haven’t worn in 10 years,
looking for an item you lost 20 minutes ago?
You have no choice Why?
would be foolish to miss,
otherwise you can’t say:
Look in your watch pocket in your grandfather’s
You could have given him the keys
right before the Battle of Bradon.
Here’s another situation you find yourself in,
when looking for something.
Did you notice
that when you are looking for something,
you can be somewhere outside, in the garage,
and every time you return to the house
and look at the place where the thing should be?
You search in the garage, return
and search in the wall box,
You are convinced that Saint Anthony
will bring those keys back to
while you search in the fucking garage.
And of course, if you are looking for car keys,
your pocket is the place
you will check at least
You will wipe your pocket down to holes.
I put them here.
I got out of the car and I had them, so, no,
come on, no, come on, wait a minute, no,
thought maybe they were hiding from my hand, no,
they are not there.
I don’t know where I’m doing them.
They were with me, you know?
Well, maybe …
Maybe they went upstairs.
Maybe they went upstairs.
and stuck to some gum, just a minute.
Maybe for the first time in my life
I dropped them to my balls.
No, no, no “
Your imagination works to its fullest.
But it’s all simple,
car keys, it’s ordinary.
Sometimes very unusual things are lost,
for example, a sofa.
Have you ever come home and found
that the fucking sofa is missing somewhere?
Nothing more than six feet in size
is self-explanatory “
no sense in wondering
he’s gone now if he wasn’t here in the morning”
Fuck you, I’m tired of this shit of yours.
Stick your logic up your ass and go to sleep! “
Yeah, you know.
My uncle liked to do that
and we liked to fuck him until he was blue in the face.
He was a real asshole.
There are guys in the hall today
wearing an earring?
How about pads for women,
do you wear them too?
This is a bad, bad joke, sorry.
This is a bad joke and I am above that.
No, not higher.
I asked this for a specific reason.
I I didn’t want to embarrass anyone,
, you know, I myself used to wear an earring
and I wonder how people feel about those
who dared to do this now,
I don’t know
I think it’s a little different now,
as it was 10 or 12 years ago,
hardly everything remains the same,
but when you wear an earring, there are some things,
I noticed something, like I said,
The only reason for this decision is very simple:
I just wanted people to think that I’m special,
And I thought, come on- I’m going to drill a hole in my body.
I only have 7 holes in my head right now,
and I will make the eighth hole in my head
and put jewelry
into it and people will have to come to terms with it.
I just wanted people to think
I was a little weird.
Obviously, it wouldn’t be weird enough
to just stand there and do it.
I wanted more.
And I thought, um, self-harm
would be fine for that.
So I drilled a hole in my head,
stuck a piece of jewelry in there and started thinking about my goals.
The first thing I noticed is
most people don’t care.
It seems like the whole world is completely indifferent
to my action.
Most people don’t even look at the earring
I noticed they are looking straight into my eyes
ignoring the earring
and I imagined what they are thinking now
they think “this asshole
wears a fucking earring”
But most people do not look at her
because they cannot accept it.
I know why this is happening,
they cannot accept it,
because they do not know what it means.
You know, some people think
that everything in the world means something.
But some things don’t mean anything at all.
But people think it means something.
It means that you are gay.
If the earring is in this ear, then you are gay.
If this means
that you like to fuck buffaloes, or something else
I don’t know.
Someone asked me, “What does this mean?”
I replied, “That means I killed a man in prison,
who was fucking asking too many questions.
This seems to satisfy his curiosity.
Another guy asked me, “Are you gay?”
I said, “Well, bend over and let’s figure it out together”
to draw an analogy,
if a person carries a small handbag,
looks like a woman’s bag, you know?
This is it, this is a woman’s handbag.
Handbag, and that’s it.
But some guys don’t like that word.
Even if they carry it, they don’t call it that.
They ask, “Have you seen my bag?”
I say, “Fuck it, this is your handbag.”
Take it and get out, okay?
If you don’t like the name,
do not use this bag.
This is a purse, and that’s it.
I had one, so what?
What does this mean?
But some want to make fun of you and ask:
And I answer: “Yes, mine is
and it has a picture of your mother
sucking at an Indian.
And it looks like it satisfies his curiosity.
So, I wore an earring
where for two or three years
but then stopped wearing it
when I heard that Andy Rooney began to wear it. (Amer. presenter)
I thought, “Fuck it.
How far can I go? “
So I stopped wearing it and my hole got overgrown,
my hole in my ear.
No, not my asshole.
Are you out of your mind?
No, if your ass is overgrown
we need to go straight to the cemetery
because you will spend a lot of time
walking along the beach
wondering why you are getting bigger.
No, no, my ear hole is overgrown with
and people noticed it.
People asked me, “Hey, you put on a little weight, huh?”
And I said, “Yes, my ear hole is overgrown.
And you are very, very observant, right?”
But right now, if you want to stand out,
right now, one earring is not enough.
You’re going to have to have a whole colony of
of these 90,067 fucking things growing on one side of your head,
like they’re out of control.
Some guys walk around
with a pile of scrap metal in their ear,
Making metal detectors beep from all over town.
Or, if you really want to be special,
you should get your nose pierced.
This will set you apart from others.
You don’t even need to get pierced anywhere,
you can get it done at home
with a paper punch.
It will make a nice straight hole,
will only hurt for about a month
and you can put your dad’s tie clip in there.
You will make a good impression during a job interview
with one of your dad’s girdle clips
sticking out of your nose.
This is your body, do what you want.
Some guys don’t.
It’s not really a man’s business at all.
You won’t see a bunch of guys with bullshit in their noses,
is more on the feminine side.
The guys figured it out a long time ago:
with this thing inside,
it fastened my nose
to the back of my skull.
It hurts like hell, man.
But I wanted to be special. “
So it’s not for men now.
Mostly men don’t do that,
more and more women.
And some women wear more than one.
Some women wear two or three
I just can’t get used to it
I mean, it’s already hard
to keep one earring clean,
and you can imagine these three nails in the nose
and even in the cold.
And you can sneeze and kill your friend.
Your friend now has a pierced eye,
which goes well with your pierced nose.
A little bit of water, you know.
A little bit of water.
A little water will do the trick.
The swallowing muscle is still working, happy to report.
Now I would like to talk a little about sports.
Sport is very important in this country.
I am a sports fan.
Nice, thank you.
Yes, I know, a lot of people
are very good at sports.
Me too … I’m not overly fanatical about sports,
but I’m not a casual spectator either.
I watched today ESPN (sports. TV channel)
I am grateful to this channel, by the way,
because on ESPN show all the strange sports.
Today was an interesting swimming sport.
Women’s 200m breaststroke.
I have never seen a woman
with a 200m breast (breast = breast, pun),
so I was extremely interested.
I’ll tell you what:
I’m a competent enough sports fan
to give advice, and I’ve come up with some rule changes to
that I would like to propose.
I think these changes
to the rules of some sports
could make them even more exciting.
For example, in soccer (American) I would like
for all 45 guys to play at the same time.
What the hell is
to stand by and watch the game?
put on your helmet and mutilate someone
for God’s sake, huh?
You’re not getting paid to watch
and forget about team building
just grab the ball and run like a son of a bitch.
Another innovation in football,
I would leave injured people on the field.
And they always talk about what kind of war is going on in the field.
Okay, then let the Red Cross
come and get these assholes.
This is how I want to change basketball.
You can make basketball much more dynamic.
Do you know what to do?
You need to enter a two-second shot clock.
Once the ball is in your hands,
Throw it back into the air.
I did not come here to watch a game “grab-not grab”,
I want to watch
at a game with a score of 400 or 500 points.
I’m a fan.
I want six overtimes
and 1000 points on the scoreboard.
Another innovation for basketball:
in the middle of the field
on each side of 10 feet
in the middle of the field
I would pour gasoline and arson.
You are talking about a quick break
you will see a really quick break.
Here’s another suggestion for basketball,
I was giving 25 points for every ball
that hit the basket bouncing off the player’s head.
You will see good fights
but the time of such games with close contacts, I assure you.
And you increase the chances
of serious injury.
This is what I’m waiting for, injury.
This is what I love about sports.
I don’t care who wins these games,
if I want to see the winners,
I will watch the Oscars.
I expect injuries, serious, lifelong,
crippling, debilitating injuries.
I’m American, show me some cruelty
and I’ll be happy.
Many people don’t admit it.
Many people don’t admit it.
They say, “I love competition.”
I want to see parts of the legs in different places.
So back to
ways to improve sports and make them more dynamic.
Baseball, as you know, needs more dynamism.
Do you know how to speed it up?
Everyone gets only one swing, that’s all.
One swing, fuck you, you’re out of touch, sit down,
let’s go from here, sit down, come on,
Here’s another trick,
to make baseball go faster,
if the pinscher hits the butter with a ball,
Hit 27 people
and get the perfect game as a result, friends.
Get two good quality precision pinschers
and you can leave baseball field
in 15 minutes.
You can go home and watch football on TV
and see real fucking injuries.
Something else for baseball.
Around the main field of
, I would place mines in random places.
Fuck in your mouth. “
Now I have to clarify: the reason I mentioned
baseball, basketball and
football is because I believe
are the only real sports.
Nothing else can be called sports, in my opinion.
Everything else is play or just activity.
Take hockey, for example.
People think hockey is a sport.
Hockey is not a sport.
Hockey is three activities,
performed at the same time.
playing with the puck
and beating a man to the shit.
If these guys were smarter,
they would take turns doing these things.
First skate on the ice,
then play with the puck,
and then go to bar
and beat someone shitty.
The day would not end so quickly
and these guys could have a lot more fun.
I will tell you one more reason why hockey is not a sport,
it is played without a ball.
All games where there is no ball
cannot be called sports.
These are my rules. I made them up myself.
Hockey is played with the puck.
What kind of washer?
I haven’t heard of the puck anywhere except in hockey.
Have you ever heard of a puck?
The only place you can find a washer is
is in the urinal,
to control the stench in the bathroom,
And as far as I know,
any game where the main item
is used in a urinal,
is definitely not a sport.
Soccer (European football),
Soccer is not a sport,
because you cannot use your hands there.
Any game where hands cannot be used
cannot be called a sport.
Tap dance is not a sport, so my rule is fair.
Another thing I don’t like about soccer is
they have points on the ball.
This is my very important rule,
no fucking dots on the ball.
People think that running is a sport.
Running is not a sport
Because anyone can do it.
Obviously, what everyone can do cannot be a sport.
I can run, you can run.
My mom can run.
You don’t see her on the cover of
Sports Illustrated, do you?
People say, “I’m going to shop
now and buy a loaf of bread.”
Okay, this is not a hell of a sport.
I won’t pay to watch you
buying a fucking loaf of bread.
Swimming is not a sport.
Swimming is needed so you don’t drown.
This is common sense.
Sailing is not a sport.
Sailing is a way to get somewhere.
Traveling by bus is not a sport.
Why the fuck would sailing be a sport?
Boxing is not a sport.
Boxing is a way to beat someone shitty.
In this regard, boxing is
a more perverse form of hockey.
But fucking someone –
is not a sport,
so that the police don’t think about it.
When police brutality becomes part of the Olympics,
then, well, boxing can become a sport.
Bowling is not a sport because you have to rent shoes.
Don’t forget – my rules, I made them up myself.
Billiards is not a sport now,
because there is no way to get seriously injured.
Unless it is about non-payment of large debts in the game.
when you see a guy
with a billiard cue in his ass,
then it can be called a sports injury.
But this is not billiards, this is a pool.
And it starts with “Pe”,
and she rhymes with “De”,
which brings us to darsa.
Dars can be a sport,
because you can pierce someone’s eye,
but dars will never be a sport,
because its goal is to get to zero,
which is contrary to all sports logic.
Lacrosse is not a sport.
Lacrosse is a fagot school activity.
But it is so.
Whenever you are standing on the field
holding a stick with a net at the end,
you are doing fagot school activities.
Ditto for field hockey and fencing.
These games are not sports,
because you cannot place bets in them.
A game where no bets can be placed cannot be a sport.
When was the last time
bet on someone fucking swordsman?
Gymnatisca is not a sport,
because Romanians are good at it.
I came to this rule for a long time,
but, thank God, I thought of it.
Polo is not a sport.
Polo is golf on horseback.
Great idea, but this is not a sport.
And water polo,
I don’t even want to mention water polo,
because it is ruthlessly cruel to horses.
Which brings us to the hunt.
Think hunting is a sport?
Ask the deer.
The only plus of hunting –
is a lot of accidents on weekends.
Which brings us to auto racing.
Now we’re talking about real fucking injuries, guys.
I don’t know about you,
but this is what I’m looking forward to in the races.
Nice crash and flames from the car.
I don’t care what wins this race.
These are the same 5 rednecks,
who always win.
Are there people who don’t give a shit about them?
I have to be honest with you.
To be honest,
doesn’t impress me at all.
I’m waiting for accidents.
Let me put it this way,
where else can I see the collision of 26 cars
and not sit in one of them?
Next we have tennis.
not a sport.
Tennis is a type of ping pong.
Actually, tennis is ping-pong,
played while standing on the table,
do you understand?
Great idea, but not a sport.
In general, all racket games –
are nothing more than a kind of ping-pong.
Even volleyball is a team ping-pong without rackets,
with an inflated ball and a raised net,
played while standing on a table.
Finally, we come to golf.
Have we ever watched golf on TV?
It’s like watching flies fuck.
I’m much more interested in taking apart the socks.
Golf could be more fun if you could play alone.
But these mistakes of nature
you have to deal with,
make this game a very boring pastime.
Think about what brains are needed to play golf.
Hit the ball with a crooked stick,
hit him again.
I say pick him up, asshole,
You’re lucky you found him at all.
Put it in your pocket and go fuck home, okay?
Good night everyone.
Thank you very much.
All the best to you.
Thank you very much.
Did you guys hear that?
They liked it.
It was amazing.
You were breathtaking, Mr. Holder.
Well done, Mr. Holder.
Do something, Boss, do something.
We’ll find another dumbass.
You’re very irresponsible, man.
You were really cool without us, man.
You were really awesome.
Do you think they’ll be back?
No, they will definitely not come back.
Good night, Mr. Holder.
Good night Pops.
He’s such a good person.
Oka Crisis | Storia
Once I told you
about the last Indian uprising
The Eye CrisisOka Crisis) – the clashes of the Mohawk Indians with the population of the Quebec village of Oka in 1990. During the crisis, which lasted 78 days, 1 Quebec policeman was killed. The crisis was the culmination of clashes between Indian tribes and Canadian authorities over land rights in the second half of the 20th century.
Confrontation in the Oka, clashes in the Oka, events in the Oka – different names for the same thing: which at one time received a wide resonance. The events of 1990 in the village of Oka near Montreal, where a very tough confrontation took place between the Mohawk Indians, who defended their rights to the sacred grove in clashes with the greedy municipality and the security forces they called.
In July-September 1990, the ground was laid for a confrontation with an attempt to expand the golf course at the expense of Indian land.
The objects of the encroachment were the ancestral cemetery and the sacred oak grove planted in time immemorial – they even claim that the oldest forest planting in North America by human hands.
Indigenous peoples across the country expressed their support and solidarity to the armed warriors in Kanesataka and Kahnawak. Kanienkehaka – “people of flint” – call themselves the Mohawks.They are one of the Haudenoshone nations, along with Oneida, Onondaga, Seneca, Cayuga and Tuscarora. Together they number between 75,000 and 100,000 in Canada and the United States.
Kanesatake is located 53 km west of Montreal. The population is about 1,400 people. Kahnawake is located 15 km west of Montreal on the banks of the St. Lawrence River. The population is 7,000 people.
Akvesasne, with a population of 12,000, is located 75 km west of Montreal, near Cornwall, Ontario, along the St. Lawrence River.The city is divided between Ontario, Quebec and New York.
Luis Caroniatakje Hall, a prominent speaker in Ganienka, artist and writer, created the flag of Unity, otherwise known as the flag of the Mohawk warriors. In 1978, a survival school began operating in Kahnawake, where students learn the Mohawk language, culture and history.
In 1979, there was a short confrontation between the soldiers and the regular police in Akvesasne. In the same year, in Kahnawake, police shot and killed Donald Cross.
In 1981, police unleashed violence against the Micmacs in Restigush, New Brunswick, which set off a wake-up call for the Kahnawake Mohawks.Various factions began to develop a confidential plan for the defense of the territory.
During the 80s of the last century, there was an increased factional struggle concerning gambling and casinos in Akvesasna. In the late 1980s, the police began to take over the Akvesasna casino, confiscate slot machines and take away business records, claiming that these casinos were tax evasion and illegal. Some Mohawks have also spoken out against casinos, accusing them of corruption and antisocial consequences.In December 1987, more than 200 police officers raided six casinos in Akvesasna, seizing slot machines.
Another form of “shadow” business has evolved in Kahnawake: cheap cigarettes as a result of smuggling. In the late 1980s, dozens of small huts lined the road.
On June 1, 1988, over 200 heavily armed police officers invaded Kahnawake and raided tobacco stalls. In response, the soldiers captured the Mercier Bridge and blocked the highway.
In July 1989, about 400 FBI agents and regular police officers invaded Akvesasne and were initially stopped by the soldiers.The police again carried out a series of raids on the casino. During this time, Mohawk warriors patrolled the streets to identify and deter the police from invading their territory. Some anti-gambling factions sided with the police.
On March 30, 1990, a Vermont National Guard helicopter was allegedly fired upon as it flew over Ganienke and was forced to land. The FBI and New York State Police attempted to infiltrate the area. The confrontation lasted for several days.
At the same time, disputes between pro-gambling and anti-gambling mohawks intensified in Akvesasna.Arson and shootings began to occur. On May 1, 1990, two Indians were killed and hundreds of police officers invaded Akvesasne. Kahnawake had other problems and much more unity; some of the proceeds from the cigarette trade were used to fund the Long House and the military community. Warriors were also used as guards. Despite the conflict in Akvesasne (or perhaps because of this), the warriors from Akvesasne continued to provide assistance to the Mohawks in Kanesataka during the spring of 1990.
The reason for the Oka crisis was the proposal to expand the golf course and new luxury houses of the golf club and the city municipality.This proposal was first made in March 1989. The Mohawks in Kanesataka became alarmed as the area designated for “development” covered parts of the pine forests, a lacrosse field, and a Mohawk cemetery.
In 1717, the governor of the colony, not in a completely legal way, transferred the land of the Indians to the Catholic seminary, so that she disposed of it in the interests of the Mohawks, the seminary neglected the second obligation, selling part of the land to the colonists, from 154 square miles by 1989 everything but 3 was sold, 6 square miles.The Indians repeatedly appealed to justice and threatened with measures, but for the time being the situation did not reach the point of aggravation.
In 1959, the local government decided to build a nine-hole golf course and related infrastructure. Then there was the first trial, a trial took place. But by the time the hearings began, the entire territory had already been put into action. The old Mohawk cemetery is now in a new setting, squeezed between the driveway and the golf club parking lot.
An attempt in the late 70s to declare the rights to land established by federal laws, after nine years of proceedings, ended unsuccessfully, for some bureaucratic reasons.The end of the 1980s was marked by regular tensions between municipal workers and Indians, and in March 1989 the mayor of Oka decided to add nine more holes at the expense of the remains of an oak grove, and to build in the neighborhood what in Russia are called “luxury cottages”.
The Indians again tried to achieve truth and justice through courts and peaceful marches, but in violation of the agreement reached, the municipality wanted to do nothing until all the details and legal issues were clarified, and the municipality wished to start work in the summer of 1989 and on August 1, the developers arranged a ceremony to cut the first tree.Although in the end they agreed to postpone their venture for nine months, but after this period, they took up their own again.
They were not frightened by the fact that the Mohawks set up a camp with a battle flag right at the site of future work. Finally, in early July 1990, the mayor sent a request to the Quebec police to intervene, citing as the reason that the defenders of the barricades erected firearms did not care about the persuasion of the Minister of Indian Affairs.
376 this is the last piece of our sacred land
The Mohawks lowered their flag on the day of the funeral, sent condolences, but refused to plead guilty.The police, in the direction of which a breeze blew, which brought her her own tear gas, retreated, and the mohawks have now built barricades at all entrances to the disputed territory, also grabbed the existing golf course, and hung out their flag there. It is alleged that a Mohawk lawyer phoned the Prime Minister of the province of Quebec, who, upon learning of the policeman’s death, ordered the abolition of the alleged second raid.
One of the most important elements of the Mohawk strategy was psychological warfare.During negotiations on radio communications, the soldiers, knowing that they were being tapped, talked about their weapons, naming one or another type that they allegedly had in their arsenal in order to intimidate the Canadian army. The Mohawks used various devices to create the appearance of a weapon. So, a disk tool for cutting metal was used to simulate the M-72 rocket launcher. A black plumbing pipe located at the rear of the pickup was disguised as an anti-tank grenade launcher. Empty shoe boxes, painted black and placed on the Mercier Bridge, looked like explosives.These tricks worked great, so the Indians did not plant real explosives on the bridge, borrowing it from the construction firms of Kahnawake. But, by the way, these tricks worked. When in late August the army circulated a press kit about the weapons of the Indians, it included a photo of the M-72.
In total, it is estimated that the Kahnawake Mohawks had 600 weapons: AK-47 assault rifles, hunting rifles, shotguns, pistols, 50-caliber semi-automatic rifles. Weapons continued to arrive throughout the summer.So, after the third or fourth week of the crisis, the Kahnawake Indians were able to get 80 AK-47 assault rifles through smuggling.
At the same time, Indian leaders from all over Canada gathered in the neighboring Mohawk community in Kannawake and decided to support the brothers by blood, the Kannawake community out of solidarity blocked the strategic bridge in Montreal, and then periodically reminded of their position, sometimes three federal roads at once were paralyzed …
Two major blockades in Ontario were imposed in solidarity in July and August.All across Canada, Indian tribes have staged solidarity with the Mohawks. Houses were seized, railways and highways were blocked, acts of sabotage took place. Unidentified persons burned down railway bridges in British Columbia and Alberta, cut off five hydroelectric towers in Ontario.
Since the Mohawks are one of the six nations of the Iroquois Confederation, brothers across Canada staged protest marches and appealed to the UN, demanding a boycott of Canada and the intervention of a peacekeeping mission. A certain number of whites, up to 7 thousand.people protested against the actions of the Indians, which resulted in the throwing of stones at the old people and women of the Indians.
Gangs of white racists formed in the surrounding cities, who organized riots and demanded that the police resort to extreme forms of violence in order to open traffic on the bridge and restore communication between cities. Later, in August of that year, these gangs attacked a group of Mohawks in full view of the indifferent white police.
White vigilantes and police in every possible way obstructed the work of human rights observers.From time to time they had to fly over and in Kahnawake by helicopter. As the Norwegian judge Finn Lingham recalled: “The only people who treated me in a civilized manner here in Canada were the Mohawks. The army and police took no action. This is very humiliating … humiliating to us, and perhaps even more humiliating to the government, which cannot provide us with access to the scene. ”
Following Bourassa’s statement, all international observers were ordered to leave.After their departure, church observers and local human rights activists were brought in. By the end of August, support for the Mohawks on the Kahnawake barricades, which had been so strong for most of the summer, began to decline. In the last days of August, only about ten soldiers, armed with AK-47 assault rifles, were on duty, while others were armed only with 22 caliber hunting rifles. Some of the barricades numbered from two to three warriors.
After Bourassa announced the end of the negotiations, the Mohawks gathered in Kahnawake to make a decision.One of the military leaders with the call sign “Little Sailor” asked the soldiers if they were ready to join the battle if the army began to attack and the majority admitted that they were not ready to pull the trigger. About 80% of Indians voted to dismantle the barricades.
571 The Liberation Army of Quebec572
On the night of August 28, army helicopters flew in and out of Kahnawake to create the impression of small aircraft, which was noted in the media. These actions were intended to confuse government officials who insisted on a military invasion, the arrest of soldiers and disarmament.The mock airlift was used by the generals as an excuse not to invade Kahnawake.
On 29 August, Mohawks and soldiers begin to dismantle the barricades around Kahnawake. By agreement with the military, masked soldiers who did not carry weapons were not arrested, as it would have taken another eight days to dismantle the barricades and reopen the Mercier Bridge. The dismantling of the barricades was broadcast on TV, and the warriors in Kanesataka learned about it. Some were completely at a loss and even considered themselves betrayed.The small group of warriors remaining in Kanesataka was the most determined and uncompromising. Relations between them and the military were still tense. Several incidents nearly led to a shootout. So, one night, soldiers made their way to the Mohawk line and stole the flag.
Barbed wire was strung across the road at Kanesatake at checkpoints, and the military seemed to have cordoned off the entire area with it. But in reality it was an appearance, since the army command cherished the hope that the soldiers would disperse on their own, as was the case in Kahnawake.During the negotiations, the officers repeatedly reminded the warriors that the safe corridor through the forest north of Kanesatake was still open. Federal officials also hoped for the exodus of soldiers from the settlement, who publicly condemned the actions of the Mohawks and promised to bring all troublemakers to justice.
Some soldiers considered these proposals of the government a trap, while others stubbornly did not want to leave their positions and stay until the end of September, when the Canadian parliament begins to hold meetings. By the end of August, only 35 warriors remained in Kanesataka.Of these, less than a dozen were from the community. Others were Oneida, Anishinabe, Mikmak, etc. A number of men from Kanesatake simply put down their weapons and stayed at home.
On August 31, a local family returned home and found their home looted. Two warriors, Lasagna and Noriega, were accused of this. At the meeting, someone wanted to arrange lynching, others offered to hand them over to the police. Lasagna and Noriega severely beat those who offered to turn them over to the police, but they were still tied down and arrested.
At the same time, the army is advancing towards the Mohawk barricades. Lieutenant General Kent Foster, the commander of the troops, concluded that a solution to the conflict through negotiations with Kanesatake was practically hopeless. With the restoration of traffic on the Mercier Bridge, the army did not have to fear retaliation from the Kahnawake soldiers in the event of the advance of military units into the rebellious territory. Lasagna and Noriega’s attack on Ronnie Bonspilla and Francis Jacobs was the final excuse to bring the army into action.
Brigadier General Roy, commander of the 5th Mechanized Brigade, issued a statement explaining the military offensive:
“I am increasingly concerned about the potential for violence in the area, given the current tensions between Indian factions and the number and types of weapons they possess. Therefore, I decided to adjust my troop deployment to ensure the safety of civilians and my soldiers in the area. This is neither an act of aggression nor an offensive action. “
The blockade, however, dragged on, and only on September 26 the conflict entered its decisive phase. The Indians considered, after consulting, that nothing else could be achieved, fortunately, they managed to save the forest and achieve attention to the needs of the indigenous peoples, solemnly buried tobacco, lit a sacred fire and gathered to leave the complex, many managed to get out without consequences for themselves through a dexterous maneuver: in a poorly guarded to throw something like a footbridge over the barbed wire in the perimeter zone; while the army was in place, the mass of participants in the event managed to scatter through the forests.
One Indian got out of the conflict area altogether, which managed to break through and through the cordon and got to the American neighboring reservation, two days later he voluntarily came to the police office. In total, as a result of the armed confrontation, 1 policeman died, two old people died – one from the effects of tear gas, the other from a heart attack after the scandal with Quebecans. The Mohawks thought it best to accept the government’s offer in exchange for $ 200,000 to abandon all legal proceedings regarding victims and violations of rights during the siege.
The confrontation in the Oka was of great importance for all the Indians of Canada – it was after this event and the public resonance caused by it that the real solution of the problems of the Indians began, and the courts began to essentially consider their complaints, only in the first year, after the skirmish, several important court decisions in favor of the indigenous population – although the Oka did not become the last place of clashes in this field.
The Kanesatake and Kahnawake Kanenkehak resistance had a profound effect on the indigenous peoples of Canada, setting the tone for resistance throughout the 1990s and inspired many people and communities to take action against the oppression of indigenous peoples.