1: Ask question.

2: Explain the person’s answer back to them using specific pet words of your choosing but in a way they agree with.

3: Ask what the person means by using Word X (one of your pet words) — but not in a general way, give them a binary distinction about one attribute of the object of Word X. If they can’t choose between the two forks of your distinction... BINGO! You got them in a dilemma. Don’t think of them as “the two horns of a dilemma on which to impale your interlocutor” think of them as “the two horse teets of which you squeeze one then the other — over and over until you get your fill of milk or until the stallion runs away”. If they are able to narrow their definition you don’t have them in a dilemma, but you are still guaranteed to get “check mate” if you follow through to step 5.

4: After they narrow their definition of Word X at your request in step 3 (repeat as many times as is needed), give an example of something Word X is only applied to in a general sense and not a narrow sense — and then accuse their definition of being totally inadequate.

5: Imply that since they don’t even understand what their own words mean then they don’t even understand what it is they are talking about. Feel free to use analogies and abstractions while pointing this out — the more self gratifying the better. Maybe tell a story where the people in the story are the same as the people you are arguing with, but with different names and in a situation which is extreme and where your character is obviously right and theirs is obviously wrong.

6: If they no longer want to talk to you, try just replacing them with someone else in the room and pick up where you left off on your side of the argument.