Book: The Art of Being Right

Overview
Arthur Schopenhauer’s The Art of Being Right, composed around 1831 and later published from his papers, is a brisk, sardonic taxonomy of 38 stratagems for winning disputes regardless of the truth. He calls the field “eristic dialectic,” the art of prevailing in argument, and contrasts it with logic, which seeks validity, and with genuine dialectic, which seeks truth. The treatise doubles as a manual and a warning: it shows how debaters manipulate conversation, and how a vigilant interlocutor or audience can recognize and neutralize such tactics.

Eristic vs. truth-seeking
Schopenhauer begins by locating the roots of dishonest disputation in psychology, vanity, pride, and the fear of losing face. People prefer to appear right rather than be right, and public debate rewards victory more than accuracy. From this grim premise he argues that arguments often unfold as contests of will, not investigations. The point is not to celebrate sophistry but to expose it. Knowing the arsenal of tricks makes one less likely to be duped and better able to hold a discussion on rational terms.

Families of stratagems
The 38 moves fall into recognizable families. Some attack the structure of reasoning: begging the question, smuggling in the conclusion as a premise; non sequitur leaps; exploiting ambiguity and homonyms; and false dilemmas that confine the opponent to an artificial choice. Others target the opponent rather than the claim: ad hominem and ad personam shifts that discredit the speaker’s character or motives, goading to anger so as to cloud judgment, or redirecting to hypocrisy rather than addressing the point. There are manipulations of scope, such as exaggerating or narrowing a thesis so it is easier to refute, and straw-manning by replacing a claim with a weaker surrogate. Burden-shifting is central: forcing the other side to prove a negative, or demanding exhaustive proof while offering none. There are theatrical tactics as well, speaking rapidly, burying the opponent in distinctions or jargon, changing the subject at a vulnerable moment, or insisting on the last word to sway the audience’s memory. Schopenhauer treats “turning the tables” as a distinct art: retorsio argumenti, using an adversary’s premise against them; and argument ex concessis, patiently collecting concessions and then springing a conclusion. As a final resort he notes the naked appeal to force or insult when reason fails, the most candid confession of eristic intent.

Defensive counsels
Against such ploys he recommends calm discrimination of terms, the insistence on clear definitions, and constant watch over the burden of proof. Do not accept concealed premises; refuse false alternatives; separate person from proposition; slow the tempo of a rushed exchange; and restate your thesis precisely to prevent distortion. Exposing the stratagems aloud often robs them of effect, especially before an audience, since eristic triumph depends on concealment.

Style and tone
The prose is tart, aphoristic, and classically schooled, full of Latin tags and nods to Aristotelian topics while openly sympathetic to the Sophists’ craft as an object of study. The humor is dry and cynical, but the moral is serious: rhetoric’s power over opinion is real and often decisive, so philosophical good faith requires both logical rigor and rhetorical awareness.

Legacy and relevance
Its compact taxonomy has outlived its nineteenth-century setting, proving salient in courtrooms, parliaments, classrooms, and social media. Readers commonly treat it as a field guide, useful for sharpening one’s own arguments, more useful for diagnosing manipulation, and most useful as a reminder that winning a point and finding the truth are distinct pursuits. Schopenhauer’s bleak anthropology yields a practical antidote: know the tricks, name them, and keep the discussion anchored to clarity and proof.