Previous
Part 3, Chapter 4
Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in How to Win Friends and Influence People, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Self-Interest vs. Selflessness
Importance and Humility
Positivity vs. Negativity
Sincerity and Appreciation vs. Insincerity and Flattery
Summary
Analysis
When speaking to people, it is important to first emphasize the things on which you agree. Get the other person saying “yes” at the beginning of the conversation rather than “no”—a “no” is much harder to overcome. When people say no, their whole physical and mental states shift, and they become ready to disagree further.
Continuing the same pattern from the last several chapters, Carnegie again illustrates how it’s best to approach arguments with positivity. In this chapter, he focuses on the fact that finding common ground can then lead to even further agreement.
Themes
James Eberson discovered the benefits of this “yes” technique. He was a bank teller, and a man came in to open an account, but there were questions on their standard form that he refused to answer. Eberson could have stated that if he did not give the bank all the information requested, they could not open the account. But instead, he agreed with the man, saying that the information wasn’t necessary to give. But then he asked if the man would want the bank to transfer his money to his next of kin in the event of his death. When the man said yes, Eberson asked if it would be a good idea to then give the bank that person’s contact information. Using this approach, the man ultimately gave all the necessary information.
This example of the bank teller gathering important information is a good example of how finding common ground at the outset is more beneficial than taking a hard line of authority, which Eberson could have done. The story demonstrates how using a friendly approach and finding ways to agree—in other words, framing a disagreement in a positive way—are much more effective strategies than angrily debating or criticizing.
Themes
Joseph Allison, a sales representative for an electric company, experienced the same thing: after 13 years of trying to get a man’s business, the man finally ordered a few motors—with the expectation that he would order several hundred more if he liked the first set. But the man later called and said the motors were too hot—he couldn’t put his hand on them. Allison agreed, saying that the man shouldn’t buy motors that are hotter than the standards for motors—citing the temperature of 72 degrees above the room’s temperature. He then asked how hot the mill room was, and the man said 75 degrees. Allison points out that it would be a bad idea to put his hand on anything that was 147 degrees, and the man agreed. Seeing reason, the man ordered the rest of the motors.
Allison’s story reinforces the same principles as Eberson’s. Rather than immediately disagreeing with the man, he instead found common ground: both of them agreed that the man shouldn’t buy motors that are hotter than what is standard. But in showing how it would be unreasonable to be able to put his hand on even a standard motor, the man came around to Allison’s viewpoint. As a result, they maintained good will, and the man ordered the rest of the motors. This demonstrates that approaching disagreements positively is much more effective than becoming argumentative.
Themes
Eddie Snow, who helps sponsor Carnegie’s courses, once became the person saying “yes.” He often rented hunting equipment, but one year the store manager convinced him to buy the equipment because he would save money in the long run. He did so by first getting Eddie to agree that he liked saving money.
Snow’s story illustrates that agreeing at the outset is more effective in an argument, and the store manager used another one of Carnegie’s techniques. He genuinely cared about what Snow wanted (to save money) rather than focusing on his own priorities (to sell the equipment).
Themes
Get the entire How to Win Friends and Influence People LitChart as a printable PDF.
Socrates, one of the greatest philosophers in the world, established the “Socratic method.” This argumentative technique involved asking questions that his opponents had to agree with, so that they were forced to come to the conclusion he wanted. Thus, the method of getting people to say yes is time-tested.
Carnegie cites the Socratic method to illustrate that his principles have been around for thousands of years—even famous historical figures used the same methods to win their arguments.
Themes
