From our development of metaphors through nurture, we have settled with the container that arguments are war. Therefore there is some brutality in arguments. To being this home, I will discuss this via rhetoric.
Rhetorically, there is a system of arguments that cause problems between the two parties that are arguing. The three parts of rhetoric are intellectual logic, charisma and passion. These are the three base pillars of rhetoric. These pillars are directly translated from Aristotle’s rhetoric for this purpose.
With passion being the root of an argument, the two parties are liable to brutal destruction. It’s like using a blunt sword and banging on a metal surface competing for the loudest noise. Or even more detrimental would be the analogy of blunt swords flashing against themselves. Void of logic and charisma, these passion-filled (or passionate) arguments are highly unstructured, give rise to no meaningful conclusions and often resolve by a party succumbing to the other; most times by spontaneous deliberation, what most people call a reality check.
Charismatic arguments are the most entertaining. Ego calls both parties into the defensive. Their speeches usually come from through assessments of precious speeches. The keys to winning these arguments are resilience in character and ad hominem fallacies. Once a party is resilient in the argument, though his truth may be skewed, the argument will flow his way because his charisma has not faltered. Another weapon in winning charismatic argument is ad hominem fallacies (or “the direct attack on the opponents character rather than answering his argument”). Such arguments often lead to a change in status including some epideictic ish.
Finally is logical arguments. The ones that make the most sense. An analogy would be guided missiles sent towards a preintended target. This arguments take the form of debates. Points are constructed with utmost care; those without strong foundations crumble at a good rebuttal. These arguments lead to new ideas, innovations and sometimes the assertions of a pre-existing fact.
Nonetheless, argument is war. Be it charismatic, logical or passionate. The only means to resolve a dispute is “let the dogs out”.