Download How To Win Friends And Influence People PDF book for free online. “How to Win Friends and Influence People” is one of the first best-selling self-help books ever published. It can enable you to make friends quickly and easily, help you to win people to your way of thinking, increase your influence, your prestige, your ability to get things done, as well as enable you to win new clients, new customers.
Twelve Things This Book Will Do For You:
Get you out of a mental rut, give you new thoughts, new visions, new ambitions.
Enable you to make friends quickly and easily.
Increase your popularity.
Help you to win people to your way of thinking.
Increase your influence, your prestige, your ability to get things done.
Enable you to win new clients, new customers.
Increase your earning power.
Make you a better salesman, a better executive.
Help you to handle complaints, avoid arguments, keep your human contacts smooth and pleasant.
Make you a better speaker, a more entertaining conversationalist.
Make the principles of psychology easy for you to apply in your daily contacts.
Help you to arouse enthusiasm among your associates.
Dale Carnegie (1888-1955) was an American writer and lecturer and the developer of famous courses in self-improvement, salesmanship, corporate training, public speaking, and interpersonal skills. Born into poverty on a farm in Missouri, he was the author of How to Win Friends and Influence People (1936), a massive bestseller that remains popular today.
Table of Contents
This grandfather of all people-skills books was first published in 1937. It was an overnight hit, eventually selling 15 million copies. How to Win Friends and Influence People is just as useful today as it was when it was first published, because Dale Carnegie had an understanding of human nature that will never be outdated. Financial success, Carnegie believed, is due 15 percent to professional knowledge and 85 percent to “the ability to express ideas, to assume leadership, and to arouse enthusiasm among people.” He teaches these skills through underlying principles of dealing with people so that they feel important and appreciated. He also emphasizes fundamental techniques for handling people without making them feel manipulated. Carnegie says you can make someone want to do what you want them to by seeing the situation from the other person’s point of view and “arousing in the other person an eager want.” You learn how to make people like you, win people over to your way of thinking, and change people without causing offense or arousing resentment. For instance, “let the other person feel that the idea is his or hers,” and “talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person.” Carnegie illustrates his points with anecdotes of historical figures, leaders of the business world, and everyday folks. –Joan Price
“it changed my life” * Warren Buffet * “The most successful self-help book of all time… Carnegie has never seemed more relevant” * The Times * “It’s helped me immeasurably in life. I think everyone should read it” * Jenny Colgan, Independent on Sunday * “a no-nonsense guide to being a better person…an easy-to-read, practical guide” * Spirit and Destiny *
Excerpt of How To Win Friends And Influence People PDF
“Don’t Kick Over the Beehive if You Want to Collect Honey”
The most dramatic manhunt New York City has ever seen reached its conclusion on May 7, 1931. “Two Gun” Crowley, the killer, the gunman who didn’t smoke or drink, was apprehended after weeks of searching, imprisoned in his sweetheart’s apartment on West End Avenue.
A hundred and fifty cops and investigators surrounded his top-floor hideout. They hacked holes in the roof and used tear gas to smoke out Crowley, the “cop killer.” They then installed machine guns on nearby buildings, and for more than an hour, one of New York’s best residential neighbourhoods echoed with the crack of pistol fire and the rattling of machine guns. Crowley, huddled behind an overstuffed chair, barraged the cops with bullets. The duel was seen by ten thousand spectators who were ecstatic. Nothing like it had ever been seen on New York’s streets before.
When Crowley was apprehended, New York Police Commissioner E. P. Mulrooney declared the two-gun desperado to be one of the most dangerous criminals the city had ever seen. “He’ll kill at the drop of a feather,” the Commissioner warned.
But what was “Two Gun” Crowley’s opinion of himself? We know because he penned a letter addressed “To whoever it may concern” as the cops were shooting at his residence. And the blood from his wounds made a scarlet trail on the paper as he wrote. “Under my clothing is a weary heart, but a gentle one — one that would do no harm,” Crowley said in his letter.
Crowley had been necking with his girl buddy on a country road out on Long Island only a few days prior. “Let me see your license,” a cop remarked abruptly as he approached the automobile.
Crowley pulled his revolver and shot the cop with a hail of lead bullets without saying anything. Crowley leaped from the car, grabbed the officer’s revolver, and fired another bullet into the prostrate officer’s body. “Under my coat is a weary heart, but a good one — one that would do nobody any harm,” the killer continued.
Crowley received an electric chair punishment. Did he remark to himself when he got at the Sing Sing death house, “This is what I get for killing people”? “This is what I get for defending myself,” he remarked.
The essence of the narrative is that “Two Gun” Crowley had no grudges towards himself.
Is this a common stance among criminals? Listen to this if you agree:
“I’ve spent the best years of my life helping people enjoy themselves by providing lighter pleasures, and all I receive in return is abuse, the existence of a hunted man.”
That’s Al Capone on the phone. Yes, America’s most infamous Public Enemy — Chicago’s most sinister gang leader ever. Capone didn’t hold a grudge against himself. He saw himself as a public benefactor, although one who was underappreciated and misunderstood.
Dutch Schultz felt the same way before he was shot by gangsters in Newark. In a newspaper interview, Dutch Schultz, one of New York’s most notorious rats, claimed to be a public benefactor. And he was convinced.
On this subject, I had some intriguing conversation with Lewis Lawes, who was for many years the warden of New York’s famed Sing Sing prison, and he said that “In Sing Sing, few of the criminals consider themselves to be bad men. They are just like you and me in terms of being human. As a result, they reason and explain. They can explain why they needed to break a safe or have a rapid trigger finger. Most of them use erroneous or logical reasoning to explain their antisocial behavior even to themselves, so adamantly claiming that they should never have been imprisoned in the first place.”
What about the individuals with whom you and I come into contact if Al Capone, “Two Gun” Crowley, Dutch Schultz, and the desperate men and women behind prison walls don’t blame themselves for anything?
John Wanamaker, the creator of the Wanamaker boutiques, famously admitted: “I learnt thirty years ago that scolding is pointless. I’m having enough problems overcoming my own limitations without worrying about God’s inequity in distributing the gift of knowledge.”
Wanamaker figured it out early on, but it took me a third of a century to realize that ninety-nine times out of a hundred, people don’t condemn themselves for anything, no matter how incorrect it is.
Criticism is pointless because it puts a person on the defensive and forces them to justify themselves. Criticism is harmful because it injures a person’s pride, diminishes his sense of importance, and causes resentment.
The world-famous psychologist B. F. Skinner demonstrated through his research that an animal rewarded for good behavior learns considerably faster and retains what it learns much better than an animal penalized for bad behavior. Humans are affected in the same way, according to later research. We don’t achieve lasting improvements by criticizing, and we often create bitterness as a result.
“As much as we crave approval, we dread judgment,” noted Hans Selye, another famous psychologist.
Employees, family members, and friends may get demoralized as a result of criticism, and the situation may still not be corrected.
George B. Johnston, of Enid, Oklahoma, works for an engineering firm as a safety coordinator. One of his jobs is to ensure that staff are wearing hard helmets while working in the field. He claimed that if he encountered workers who were not wearing hard hats, he would inform them of the regulation and that they must follow it. As a result, he would be met with glum acceptance, and the workers would frequently remove the hats after he had left.
He made the decision to take a different approach. When he saw several of the workers not wearing their hard hats the next time, he inquired as to whether the hats were uncomfortable or did not fit well. Then, in a nice tone of voice, he reminded the guys that the hat was designed to protect them from injury and that they should always wear it on the job. As a result, there was enhanced regulatory compliance with no resentment or emotional distress.
Thousands of pages of history are littered with examples of criticism’s failure. Take, for example, Theodore Roosevelt’s famous spat with President Taft, a feud that splintered the Republican Party, propelled Woodrow Wilson to the White House, and drew bright, luminous lines across the First World War, altering the course of history. Let’s take a short look at the facts. When Theodore Roosevelt left the White House in 1908, he backed William Howard Taft for President. Theodore Roosevelt then traveled to Africa to hunt lions. He burst when he returned. He chastised Taft for his conservatism, attempted to win his own nomination for a third term, founded the Bull Moose party, and nearly destroyed the G.O.P. Only two states, Vermont and Utah, were won by William Howard Taft and the Republican Party in the election that followed. The party had never suffered such a humiliating defeat.
President Taft was blamed by Theodore Roosevelt, but did he blame himself? Obviously not. “I don’t see how I could have done any differently than what I have,” Taft remarked, tears in his eyes.
Who was to blame for this? Roosevelt or Taft, who won? To be honest, I have no idea and don’t care. The point I’m trying to convey is that no amount of criticism from Theodore Roosevelt could persuade Taft that he was incorrect. It only served to legitimize Taft’s actions, prompting him to say, with tears in his eyes, “I don’t see how I could have done any differently than I have.”
Take, for example, the Teapot Dome oil spill. In the early 1920s, it made the newspapers ring with outrage. It shook the entire country! Nothing like that had ever transpired in American public life in the memory of living men. The following are the bare facts surrounding the scandal: Albert B. Fall, Harding’s secretary of the interior, was entrusted with leasing the government’s oil reserves at Elk Hill and Teapot Dome, which had been placed aside for the Navy’s future use. Was competitive bidding allowed by Secretary Fall? No, sir; he gave his friend Edward L. Doheny the huge, delicious contract altogether. So, what exactly did Doheny do? He handed Secretary Fall a one-hundred-thousand-dollar “loan,” as he liked to put it. Then, in a show of force, Secretary Fall sent US Marines into the territory to chase away competitors whose nearby wells were sucking oil from the Elk Hill deposits. These competitors ran into court, forced off their feet by firearms and bayonets, and blew the lid off the Teapot Dome scam. A stink arose that wrecked the Harding Administration, sickened an entire nation, threatened to destroy the Republican Party, and landed Albert B. Fall in prison.
Fall was roundly chastised — as few men in public life have ever been. Is he remorseful? Never! Years later, Herbert Hoover implied in a public speech that President Harding died of mental anguish and stress as a result of a friend’s betrayal. When Mrs. Fall learned of this, she leapt from her chair, sobbed, swung her fists at fate, and screamed: “What are you talking about? Fall betrayed Harding? No! My husband has never betrayed a single person. My husband would not be tempted to do anything bad in this mansion full of gold. He is the one who was betrayed and crucified after being taken to the slaughter.”
There you have it: human nature at work, wrongdoers blaming everyone except themselves. That is how we are all. So, the next time you or I are tempted to criticize someone, think about Al Capone, “Two Gun” Crowley, and Albert Fall. Let us remember that criticisms are similar to homing birds. They always make it back home. Let us recognize that the person we are about to chastise and condemn will almost certainly excuse himself or herself and condemn us in return; or, as the mild Taft put it, “I don’t see how I could have done anything differently.”
Abraham Lincoln died in a hall bedroom of a small lodging house right across the street from Ford’s Theater, where John Wilkes Booth had shot him, on April 15, 1865. Lincoln’s long figure lay diagonally across a drooping, too-short bed. A dingy gas jet flashed yellow light above the bed, and a shoddy replica of Rosa Bonheur’s famed artwork The Horse Fair hung above it.
“There lies the most ideal ruler of mankind that the world has ever seen,” Secretary of War Stanton declared as Lincoln lay dying.
What was the secret to Lincoln’s people-handling success? I spent ten years researching Abraham Lincoln’s life and three years writing and rewriting a book called Lincoln the Unknown. I feel I have conducted the most in-depth and thorough examination of Lincoln’s personality and home life that any human being is capable of. I studied Lincoln’s approach to dealing with people in depth. Did he criticize others? Yes, of course. He not only ridiculed people as a young man in Indiana’s Pigeon Creek Valley, but he also penned letters and poems mocking them and left them on country roads where they were sure to be found. One of these letters sparked feelings of anger that lasted a lifetime.
Even after becoming a practicing lawyer in Springfield, Illinois, Lincoln continued to freely criticize his opponents in newspaper letters. But he did it far too frequently.
He mocked a vain, pugnacious politician named James Shields in the autumn of 1842. In an anonymous letter published in the Springfield Journal, Lincoln mocked him. The whole village burst out laughing. Shields, a sensitive and proud woman, bubbled with rage. When he discovered who had sent the letter, he sprang on his horse and chased Lincoln down, challenging him to a duel. Lincoln was adamant about not fighting. He didn’t want to duel, but he couldn’t get out of it without jeopardizing his honor. He was given a list of weapons to choose from. He chose cavalry broadswords and got sword fighting instruction from a West Point graduate. On the scheduled day, he and Shields met on a sandbar in the Mississippi River, ready to fight to the death; but, at the last minute, their seconds interfered and stopped the duel.
That was Lincoln’s most harrowing personal experience. It provided him a priceless lesson in how to interact with people. He never wrote another disrespectful letter after that. He never ridiculed anyone else after that. Since then, he has basically never criticized anyone for anything.
Throughout the Civil War, Lincoln appointed new generals to lead the Army of the Potomac, and each one — McClellan, Pope, Burnside, Hooker, and Meade — blundered fatally, leaving Lincoln pacing the floor in despair. The generals were roundly criticized by half of the country, but Lincoln, “with hate against none, with charity for all,” kept his cool. “Judge not, lest ye be judged,” was one of his favorite quotes.
When Mrs. Lincoln and others criticized the southerners, Lincoln responded, “Don’t judge them; they are exactly what we would be in comparable circumstances.”
Lincoln, on the other hand, had plenty of opportunities to critique. Let’s have a look at one example:
During the first three days of July 1863, the Battle of Gettysburg took place. During the night of July 4, Lee began retreating southward as storm clouds poured rain down across the country. Lee’s beaten army arrived at the Potomac River to find a swollen, impassable river in front of him and a victorious Union Army behind him. Lee was caught in a snare. He was unable to flee. Lincoln was aware of this. Here was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to seize Lee’s army and put an end to the conflict right away. So, with a swell of optimism, Lincoln told Meade not to convene a council of war, but to strike Lee right away. Lincoln sent a special messenger to Meade, demanding rapid action, after telegraphing his commands.
What was General Meade’s response? He did exactly the opposite of what he was taught. In defiance of Lincoln’s orders, he convened a council of war. He paused for a moment. He was a procrastinator. He telegraphed a slew of justifications. He flatly refused to attack Lee. Finally, the waters receded, allowing Lee and his forces to flee across the Potomac.
Lincoln was incensed. “What does this mean?” says the narrator. To his son Robert, Lincoln wept. “What a wonderful God! What exactly does this imply? We had them in our grasp, and all we had to do was extend out our hands to claim them; yet, nothing I said or did could get the troops to move. Almost any general could have defeated Lee in those conditions. I could have whipped him personally if I had gone up there.”
Lincoln sat down, disappointed, and composed this letter to Meade. And keep in mind that at this time in his life, Lincoln was a very conservative and reserved speaker. As a result, Lincoln’s letter of 1863 was a stern censure.
I don’t believe you get the gravity of Lee’s predicament. He was within easy reach, and capturing him, combined with our other recent victories, would have brought the battle to a close. As things stand, the battle will drag on indefinitely. How can you possible attack Lee south of the river if you couldn’t do so safely last Monday, when you can only take a third of the force you had at the time? It would be ridiculous to expect much from you right now, and I don’t think you can. Your golden opportunity has passed you by, and I am greatly distressed as a result.
What do you think Meade did after reading the letter?
That letter was never seen by Meade. It was never mailed by Lincoln. After his death, it was discovered among his papers.
My hypothesis is that after finishing that letter, Lincoln gazed out the window and said to himself, “Just a moment. Maybe I shouldn’t be so hasty. It’s easy for me to sit here in the quiet of the White House and order Meade to attack; but if I’d been up at Gettysburg, and seen as much blood as Meade has seen in the last week, and had my ears pierced by the screams and shrieks of the wounded and dying, perhaps I wouldn’t be so eager to attack either. Perhaps if I had Meade’s hesitant demeanor, I would have done exactly what he did. In any case, it’s now water under the bridge. It will relieve my feelings if I send this letter, but it will force Meade to justify himself. It will lead to his condemnation of me. It will incite resentment, limit his future utility as a commander, and possibly force him to resign from the army.”
As I previously stated, Lincoln set the letter aside because he had learned the hard way that harsh critiques and rebukes nearly always result in futility.
When President Theodore Roosevelt was faced with a complex problem, he leaned back and looked up at a great painting of Abraham Lincoln that hung above his desk in the White House and asked himself, “If Lincoln were in my situation, what would he do? How would he approach this issue?”
Pull a five-dollar bill from your pocket the next time you’re inclined to chastise someone, glance at Lincoln’s portrait on the bill, and ask yourself, “How would Lincoln manage this situation if he had it?”
When Mark Twain was enraged, he would write letters that turned the paper brown. He once wrote to a man who had enraged him, for example: “A burial permission is what you need. All you have to do is talk, and I’ll make sure you receive it.” He complained to an editor about a proofreader’s attempts to “fix my spelling and punctuation” on another occasion. “Set the subject according to my text hereafter, and make sure the proofreader keeps his ideas in the mush of his rotted brain,” he said.
Mark Twain felt better after composing these vexing letters. They allowed him to vent his frustrations, yet the letters had no real impact because Mark Twain’s wife had covertly removed them from the mail. They were never delivered.
Do you know someone you’d like to improve, reform, and regulate? Good! That’s all right. I wholeheartedly support it. But why don’t you start with yourself? From a purely selfish standpoint, that’s a lot more profitable — and, certainly, a lot less dangerous — than trying to help others. “Don’t whine about the snow on your neighbor’s roof when your own doorway is filthy,” Confucius said.
I wrote a silly letter to Richard Harding Davis, an author who once loomed enormous on America’s literary horizon, while I was still young and trying to impress others. I was writing an article about authors for a magazine and asked Davis to tell me about his process. I had received a letter from someone a few weeks before with the following comment at the bottom: “Dictated but not read.” I was pretty taken aback. I had the impression that the author was a huge, busy, and influential person. I wasn’t particularly busy, but I wanted to make a good first impression on Richard Harding Davis, so I closed my brief note with the phrase “Dictated but not read.”
He never bothered to respond to the letter. He simply handed it back to me with the following scribbled on the bottom: “Your awful manners are only surpassed by your bad manners.” True, I had made a mistake, and perhaps I deserved this chastisement. However, as a human, I loathed it. I disliked it so much that when I learned of Richard Harding Davis’ death ten years later, the first thing that sprang to mind — I’m ashamed to admit — was the pain he had caused me.
Let us indulge in a little harsh criticism tomorrow, no matter how certain we are that it is appropriate, if we want to stir up animosity that will reverberate through the decades and last until death.
When dealing with people, keep in mind that we are not dealing with rational beings. We’re dealing with emotional creatures, creatures full of preconceptions and driven by pride and vanity.
The sensitive Thomas Hardy, one of the greatest authors to ever enhance English language, was forced to retire from fiction writing due to harsh criticism. The English poet Thomas Chatterton committed suicide as a result of criticism.
Benjamin Franklin, a brash young man, became so polite and skilled at dealing with people that he was appointed American Ambassador to France. What is the key to his success? “I shall speak badly of no man…and all the good I know of everyone,” he stated.
Any fool, and most fools, may criticize, condemn, and complain.
To be understanding and forgiving, though, requires character and self-control.
“A great man demonstrates his grandeur by the way he treats little men,” Carlyle observed.
Bob Hoover, a well-known test pilot and frequent air show performer, was flying back to Los Angeles from a show in San Diego. Both engines abruptly stopped around 300 feet in the air, according to the magazine Flight Operations. He managed to land the jet with expert maneuvering, although it was heavily damaged, despite the fact that no one was injured.
The first thing Hoover did following the emergency landing was assess the plane’s fuel. The World War II propeller plane he was flying had been filled with jet fuel rather than gasoline, just as he had suspected.
He requested to see the mechanic who had maintained his plane when he returned to the airport. The young man was in excruciating pain as a result of his blunder. As Hoover neared, tears ran down his cheeks. He had just lost a very expensive plane and had the potential to lose three lives as well.
Hoover’s rage is understandable. The tongue-lashing that this proud and meticulous pilot would unleash for that negligence was predictable. Hoover, on the other hand, did not chastise or even condemn the mechanic. “To show you I’m sure you won’t do this again,” he continued, putting his massive arm around the man’s shoulder. “I want you to service my F-51 tomorrow.”
Parents are frequently inclined to chastise their children. I’m sure you’re expecting me to say “don’t.” However, I shall not do so. “Read one of the classics of American journalism, ‘Father Forgets,’ before you critique them,” I’ll simply say. It was first published in the People’s Home Journal as an editorial. With the author’s permission, we are reproducing it here as condensed in the Reader’s Digest:
“Father Forgets” is one of those short stories that, while being written in a spur of the moment, strikes such a connection with so many readers that it becomes an annual reprint favorite. It has been around since the beginning “”Father Forgets” has been reprinted “in hundreds of periodicals and house organs, and in newspapers all over the country,” according to the author, W. Livingston Larned. It’s been reproduced almost as many times in other languages. Thousands of people have asked for permission to read it from school, church, and lecture platforms, and I have granted them my personal permission. On numerous instances and programs, it has been ‘on the air.’ College periodicals, as well as high-school magazines, have used it. Occasionally, a small piece appears to ‘click.’ That was the case with this one.”
FATHER HAS FORGOTTEN
Larned, W. Livingston
Pay attention, son: As you sleep with one small paw tucked under your cheek and your golden curls sticky wet on your damp forehead, I’m saying this. I’ve snuck into your room by myself. A suffocating sense of guilt washed over me just a few minutes ago as I sat in the library reading my assignment. I came to your bedside with a guilty conscience.
These are some of my thoughts, son: I had been irritated with you. I admonished you as you were getting ready for school because you only dabbed your face with a towel. I chastised you for not washing your shoes. When you flung several of your belongings on the floor, I yelled violently.
I, too, found fault at breakfast. You spilled a lot of things. You took a big sip of your meal. You lean against the table with your elbows. You slathered too much butter on your bread. And as you began to play while I made my way to the train station, you turned and waved a hand, saying, “Goodbye, Daddy!” I frowned and replied, “Hold your shoulders back!”
Then, in the late afternoon, everything started all over again. I saw you down on your knees, playing marbles, as I drove up the road. Your stockings had holes in them. I embarrassed you in front of your boyfriends by marching you to the home ahead of me. Stockings were pricey, and if you had to pay for them, you’d be more cautious! Imagine hearing it from your father, son!
Do you recall how you came in timidly, with a hurt expression in your eyes, later, while I was reading in the library? You paused at the door as I looked up from my paper, irritated by the interruption. “Can you tell me what you’re looking for?” I became enraged.
You didn’t say anything, but you raced across the room, flung your arms around my neck, and kissed me, your small arms tightening with a devotion that God had planted in your heart and that even neglect couldn’t kill. Then you disappeared, pattering up the stairwell.
Well, son, my paper fell from my grip shortly after, and I felt a terrible nauseating panic wash over me. What has been happening to me as a result of my habit? This was my reward for being a boy: the habit of finding fault and reprimanding. It wasn’t that I didn’t care about you; it was just that I had unrealistic expectations of youth. I was judging you using my own years as a standard.
And there was so much in your character that was wonderful, fine, and honest. You have a heart as huge as the dawn itself over the rolling hills. Your sudden instinct to hurry in and kiss me good night demonstrated this. Tonight, nothing else matters, son. I’ve arrived at your bedside in the dark, and I’ve knelt there, embarrassed!
It’s a pitiful atonement; I’m sure you wouldn’t comprehend if I told you these things during the day. But tomorrow, I’ll be a true father! I’ll hang out with you, and I’ll cry when you cry and laugh when you laugh. When impatient words arise, I’ll bite my tongue. “He is nothing but a boy — a tiny boy!” I’ll repeat as if it were a rite.
I’m afraid I had you in mind as a male. But, son, I see you now, crumpled and tired in your cot, and I imagine you as a newborn. You were in your mother’s arms the other day, your head on her shoulder. I’ve asked far too many questions.
Rather of judging others, let us endeavor to comprehend them. Let’s see if we can figure out why they act the way they do. That’s a lot more interesting and profitable than criticism, because it fosters empathy, tolerance, and kindness. “To know everything is to forgive everything.”
“God himself, sir, does not propose to judge man until the end of his days,” Dr. Johnson said.
Why should we, you and I, care?
Don’t chastise, condemn, or moan.
Dale Carnegie’s copyright © 1936
Summary How to Win Friends and Influence People PDF
Ninety-nine times out of a hundred, people don’t criticize themselves for anything, no matter how wrong it may be.
Criticism is futile because it puts us on the defensive and usually makes us strive to justify ourselves. Criticism is dangerous, because it wounds our pride, hurts our sense of importance, and arouses resentment.
Don’t criticize others; they are just what we would be under similar circumstances.
“Don’t complain about the snow on your neighbor’s roof when your own doorstep is unclean.”—Confucius
We’re not logical; we’re emotional, motivated by pride and vanity.
“I will speak ill of no man and speak all the good I know of everybody.”—Benjamin Franklin
Rather than condemn others, try to understand them. Try to figure out why they do what they do.
We all want to be appreciated.
“I consider my ability to arouse enthusiasm among my people. The greatest asset I possess and t way to develop the best that is in a person is by appreciation and encouragement.”—Charles Schwab
Before trying to persuade someone to do something, ask yourself, “How can I make this person want to do it?”
“If there is any one secret of success it lies in the ability to get the other person’s point of view and see things from that person’s angle as well as from your own.”—Henry Ford
“You can make more friends in two months by becoming interested in other people than you can in two years by trying to get other people interested in you.”
“It is the individual who is not interested in his fellow men who has the greatest difficulties in life and provides the greatest injury to others. It is from among such individuals that all human failures spring.”
Encourage others to talk about themselves.
Always make the others feel important.
Most people you meet will feel superior to you in some way. A sure way to their hearts is to let them realize in some subtle way that you recognize their importance, and recognize it sincerely.
“Talk to people about themselves and they will listen for hours.”—Disraeli
“If you argue and rankle and contradict, you may achieve a victory sometimes; but it will be an empty victory because you will never get your opponent’s good will.”
How to keep a disagreement from becoming an argument:
- Welcome the disagreement
- Distrust your first instinctive impression
- Control your temper
- Listen first
- Look for areas of agreement
- Be honest
- Promise to think over your opponents’ ideas and study them carefully
- Thank your opponents sincerely for their interest
- Postpone action to give both sides time to think through the problem
“There’s magic, positive magic, in such phrases as: ‘I may be wrong. I frequently am. Let’s examine the facts.’”
“Don’t argue with your customer or your spouse or your adversary. Don’t tell them they are wrong. Don’t get them stirred up. Use a little diplomacy.”
“If we know we are going to be rebuked anyhow, isn’t it far better to beat the other person to it and do it ourselves?”
“Say about yourself all the derogatory things you know the other person is thinking or wants to say or intends to say—and say them before that person has a chance to say them.”
When you’re right, try to win people gently and tactfully to your way of thinking. When you’re wrong, admit your mistakes quickly and with enthusiasm.
“In talking with people, don’t begin by discussing the things on which you differ. Begin by emphasizing—and keep on emphasizing—the things on which you agree. Keep emphasizing, if possible, that you are both striving for the same end and that your only difference is one of method and not of purpose. Get the other person saying, ‘Yes, yes’ at the outset. Keep your opponent, if possible, from saying ‘No.’”
“Remember that other people may be totally wrong. But they don’t think so. Don’t condemn them. Any fool can do that. Try to understand them. Only wise, tolerant, exceptional people even try to do that”
“If, as a result of reading this book, you get only one thing—an increased tendency to think always in terms of the other person’s point of view, and see things from that person’s angle as well as your own—if you get only that one thing from this book, it may easily prove to be one of the stepping—stones of your career.”
How to stop arguments, eliminate ill feeling, create good will, and make the other person listen attentively: “I don’t blame you one iota for feeling as you do. If I were you I would undoubtedly feel just as you do.”
“Three-fourths of the people you will ever meet are hungering and thirsting for sympathy. Give it to them, and they will love you.”
It’s always easier to listen to unpleasant things after we have heard some praise of our good points.
“Calling attention to one’s mistakes indirectly works wonders with sensitive people who may resent bitterly any direct criticism.”
“It isn’t nearly so difficult to listen to a recital of your faults if the person criticizing begins by humbly admitting that he, too, is far from impeccable.”
“Admitting one’s own mistakes—even when one hasn’t corrected them—can help convince somebody to change his behavior.”
“People are more likely to accept an order if they have had a part in the decision that caused the order to be issued.”
“Everybody likes to be praised, but when praise is specific, it comes across as sincere—not something the other person may be saying just to make one feel good.”
“If you want to improve a person in a certain aspect, act as though that particular trait were already one of his or her outstanding characteristics.”
“Tell your child, your spouse, or your employee that he or she is stupid or dumb at a certain thing, has no gift for it and is doing it all wrong, and you have destroyed almost every incentive to try to improve. But use the opposite technique—be liberal with your encouragement, make the thing seem easy to do, let the other person know that you have faith in his ability to do it, that he has an undeveloped flair for it—and he will practice until the dawn comes in the window in order to excel.”
About the Author
Dale Carnegie (1888–1955) described himself as a “simple country boy” from Missouri but was also a pioneer of the self-improvement genre. Since the 1936 publication of his first book, How to Win Friends and Influence People, he has touched millions of readers and his classic works continue to impact lives to this day.