Negociation, Threat and Transitivity

The article aims to highlight that in the business world, especially negotiation, it can be seen in at least two respects: threat and inference, emphasizing the second one. Although usually the two are oposittes, sometimes they coincide. On the one hand, the opposition is that the threat is a tool of coercion, while inference is the tool of persuasion. On the other hand the two can coincide. In that case, the threat is not a dirty procedure. By means of threat is corrected the relationship between partners threat as ethics report. The instrument used here is called transitive inference scheme. Its premises are conditionals interpreted by two material implications. I bring actual the results of a previous research. According to those, each of the two implications has its own set of other truth functions as premises. Cartesian product of two sets of functions offer 36 pairs of premises for the conclusion which was originally obtained from two conditionals. The 36 schemes reasoning in this case are all possible inference schemes behavior of a partner during a negotiation and represent the main finding. Reasoning scheme and all its variants are all routines of thinking. Some are brief, others are more extensive. Some are more convincing than others. Inference scheme could also be part of the negotiation scenario. As a result, inferention schemes guided behavior, should be prepared in advance. Studying anticipated the inferences to be used in negotiating we try to anticipate which of these inferences could be a more compelling for the business partner.