Argue to learn, not to win.
From the book “How to Win Friends and Influence People” I learned that the best way to win an argument is to avaoid it
But last night I read this from “Growing Object-Oriented Software Guided By Tests”:
Ahh! They were not arguing to win. They were arguing to learn from each other.
So it’s okay to argue if your goal and your colleague’s goal is to learn; but it’s best to avoid arguments if either your goal or your colleague’s goal is to win.
What do you think about that?