Here is the premise: First; The Pragmatic* want everyone to agree on everything. EVERYONE must agree on EVERYTHING. That is the basic idea the Pragmatic* live by. We must, for instance, agree that not everyone thinks correctly, but we all must try to make them think correctly. Second; The Romantics* want to make the world perfect. They argue and argue until we have found the best way possible to do things. Ideally, once the Romantics* have found the perfect way for everyone to live, think, and go about their lives, the Pragmatic* will find peace because things get settled, but we are far from a perfect world, so we are still working on the perfect life advice that will work to perfection every time, with everyone, without fail.

Because the Pragmatic*’s main question is: “OK so what have we agreed / do we agree on?” the main task for any lobbyist, idealist, or world changer is to move the masses from the Romantics* end, the Romantics*, whose main question is: “So what is the best possible way to do this, all things considered?” First, you have to reach a general consensus in the mind of the Romantics* that THIS is the best way forward, and THEN, inform the Pragmatic* that this is how we have decided to do things.

The decision-makers are mainly the Pragmatic*. Therefore, any expert, professional, or consult, often the Romantics* who are always open to suggestions, must stop making recommendations and start making decisions on behalf of the Pragmatic*. “This is what the expert agree on, and say we must do” rather than: “We think the best way forward might be… discussion must happen on…” and other expressions that the Romantics* use in order to not appear too pushy or too authoritarian to other, very capable people. This is the power message for any ambassador or a spokesperson of any organization: to move the masses, you must deliver the message as if it had already been decided, obvious, done deal, and the rest would be a mere formality; let’s say: “Public has decided and spoken that gay marriage must be legalized” rather than “gay marriage enjoys high support from the public, but…?” No buts!

Power phrases

“Like everyone is well aware / already knows…”

“As has been well proven…”

“Clearly, obviously,”

“Without any need to repeat what everyone already knows…”

“It is a commonly held practise to…”

“the Pragmatic* woman/man does/believes/wears/uses…”

Whatever you can realistically throw into the “what we already know/do/have decided” category, do not even bother to discuss anymore, just point in the general direction as “already decided” “already known,” “the deal is done.” Everyone who is in any way uncertain about what you might be talking about will now be working hard to catch up to avoid the label of “poorly informed.”

In other words, what is already as clear as we can get it for the time being; global warming is happening, gay rights will happen, women’s rights must be equal to those of men (without over-riding men’s equal rights, mind you), can be thrown into the speech as a done deal. Do not throw in stuff that we are not in clear enough grounds yet, what you wouldn’t dare to bring up in front of a random group of people that you want to remain friends with – anything controversial is not “as we already know” but that is the stuff we will still be arguing over.

Just help the Pragmatic* onto a solid ground and inform them on what is already the general agreement, the popular opinion, because they will never be quite sure of it – they try hard to follow it, but for as long as legalities are lagging behind, they do not know for sure WHY that is still in question and what they should think about it.

So-and-so will be deciding on so-and-so

Everything that is still undecided, and every time you can, mention who is making a decision and by what time. Also inform the public if they do not need to add their own opinion into the mix; “there is plenty of information available, and no more opinions are needed to weigh in.” Do not suggest a place where they could chime in on the matter, unless it is absolutely vital to get the public’s opinion on a matter.

the Pragmatic* do not make decisions for themselves but for the community

While to a Romantics*, it is easy to decide that “OK, I have decided, this is what I think, this is what I support, and this is what I believe to be true and the right way to do things” the Pragmatic* will always ask questions, be uncertain, and on the fence for as long as there is no clear decision made about it. They will stall, ask more questions, they will look around, be indecisive and eternally careful not to walk over someone else’s opinion.

the Romantics* are not far from this trait. Even though they have already decided for themselves what they will fight for to their dying breath, they will still try to be polite and gentle about things and try not to ram their strong opinion down anyone’s throats, and allow others the time to adjust to the idea. They may also be wondering WHAT is taking the Pragmatic* so long to make up their mind and sign the papers… and rather than presenting the idea with a nonchalant “this is a no-brainer” they will not push the Pragmatic* into a decision they are uncertain about, out of politeness and respect for other people’s opinions, no matter how far from sensible they would be. The Pragmatic* will interpret this type of politeness as indecision or insecurity, and they will thus hesitate to follow suit.

The Romantics*: “Why is this taking so long for them to make up their minds about this, this is a no-brainer?!”

The Pragmatic*: “Why can’t they decide what we should do, they are the experts here, this seems quite like a no-brainer!”

The Romantics* are waiting for each single individual to decide on their OWN position, where the Pragmatic* are waiting for one individual to make a decision for everyone else, assuming that if nobody objects, everyone agrees. The Pragmatic*, also, are quick to argue about things. They test other people’s resolve and faith in their own arguments by this, but the trouble is, they do not always argue logically but emotionally. They test people’s feelings, not their logic. This confuses the Romantics*, who test people’s logic, not their emotion, and as the Pragmatic* are arguing over logical matters with illogical arguments, the Romantics* don’t know what to do, because they can’t argue logical matters with people who do not follow the rules of logic. (Typically the Romantics* are men, but not always.) The Pragmatic* are thus asking “How sure are you of yourself because I haven’t got the foggiest idea of what you are talking about?” Therefore, they test the Romantics*’s emotions not their logic, and if the Romantics* backs down because they don’t know how to argue illogical points, and do not want to appear overbearing, the Pragmatic* figures “OK you DON’T KNOW what you are doing, therefore we can’t make a decision based on your thinking, either.”

The Romantics*, also, do not want to make anyone’s mind up for them, so they back down from a fight easier than the Pragmatic*, even though it is the Pragmatic* with less certain opinions than the Romantics* has. The Romantics* simply thinks “you can’t win an argument with someone who simply argues a point with non-logical facts and irrelated facts and whatever they think of” so they give up the fight thinking it feels like trying to beat up water. The Pragmatic* will keep going, because they only want to know when the Romantics* are sure of themselves enough to make a decision on the matter.

Compromise and decisions

The Romantics* may push a decision through without actually consulting the Pragmatic* further, just because they feel the Pragmatic* are arguing for the sake of arguing, rather than actually for a cause – which is true – and they get fed up waiting for them to agree to the obvious decision. The Pragmatic* sigh of relief: “Finally they came to a conclusion!” The Pragmatic* do not mind which way the decision swings, as long as the experts are sure of what they are doing, but when the Romantics* push a decision through in frustration of the Pragmatic* indecisiveness, the Pragmatic* think they push a decision through because they give up trying to find a better solution and  simply decide to push through the best guess they’ve got in use.

It is NOT NECESSARY to compromise with the Pragmatic* in “a logical” argument. In fact, they think that is uncertainty and insecurity showing through, and they lose their respect for a person. The Romantics* need compromise sometimes if they can’t agree on things, but their compromise is often: OK, you are allowed to that, and I am allowed to this, rather than we have to come to a middle ground agreement. With the Pragmatic* both lose, because the Romantics* argues emotionally: How sure are you of yourself, but the Romantics* thinks the Pragmatic* is arguing about facts from their perspective. When the Romantics* doesn’t understand the Pragmatic*’s logic, they are likely to give in because they don’t know where the Pragmatic* is coming from and they are unable to explain where they are coming from – after all, this argument isn’t logical.

Stand firm, do not budge

For a Romantics*, it is important to recognise when someone is arguing logically and when they are arguing to test your logic emotionally, because they, themselves, haven’t got a clue (and they know it, too). Do not give an inch unless they give you a reason to. That is the only way they will ever trust you. Even if they manage to find a kernel of truth by accident, do not admit to it, do not get puzzled during an emotional argument – if it is important, add that into the papers (or whatever) later, or include it into your points later, but during this argument, do not sway, unless you completely, authentically, changed your mind about things.

It is OK to get angry with an emotional arguer. All they want to know is how you feel about things. If this is really important to you, they will let you have your way. They expect you to get emotional about stuff that you care about. The Romantics* expect you to be logical about it, and know what you are talking about, know your facts, figures, and scientific background or anything else that you have to support your case. They bow down to sound thinking, but the Pragmatic* only test how certain, how serious you are. Knowing that will get you far.

Subscribe to get a Daily Message