XFilesGeek
Pretentiousness personified.
Joined: Jul 25, 2010
Posts: 1791
Location: The Oort Cloud
|
 Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 8:30 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Oh, and saying that we should only debate if we want to change someone's mind is like saying you should only fence if you can kill the other person you're fencing with.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced." |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| XFilesGeek wrote: | | Oh, and saying that we should only debate if we want to change someone's mind is like saying you should only fence if you can kill the other person you're fencing with. |
i agree. on WP i usually argue as a way to express my ideas for third parties (i.e. other members) to make a decision about a topic. i don't aim to convince my opponents.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
pensieve
President of Gallifrey
Joined: Nov 19, 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 7447
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think arguing is always about getting someone to change their opinion, but rather agree with you. For me arguing is short term stimulation and nothing more. I can get so worked up and absorbed into a discussion and then suddenly find no interest in it, and wondered why I wasted all that time in the first place.
When I detect a person becoming emotional over an issue I either try to point out how counter productive it is, or if I'm not in the best control of my own emotions I'd tell them to stop being so over emotional, because you know...that whole intense world syndrome thing. Even when I read a post it has emotion attached to it.
I'm not sure if I understood all the points in the original post but when I come into an argument it's more about bringing to the discussion one or even two things both sides have overlooked. It's both a blessing and a curse, because sometimes I just never agree. Bit annoying really.
Yes, politics is all about emotions. I was surprised when my PM went back to the old rhetoric of attacking the opposition. For generations it's been the same argument. One party for the rich, the other for the working families. Neither is actually for the working families.
_________________
My autism blog - http://latedx.wordpress.com
My completely random though usually about Doctor Who blog - http://alonsy.tumblr.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
edgewaters
hibernating
Joined: Aug 17, 2006
Age: 40
Posts: 2426
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| XFilesGeek wrote: | Emotions are at the heart of any and all political debates.
You can say, "Noooooo...all of my political opinions are based on evidence and logic!"
I call bullplop. Politics is nothing more than a bunch of monkeys arguing over who gets the best position at the waterhole. That's it.
Which monkeys you think should get the best position at the waterhole will be based on personal preference, experience, and how you were raised. You'll choose to ignore evidence that contradicts your biases, and instead accuse others of having biases. |
Yeah, that's why I avoid political debate lately. I will sometimes do policy debate, or local politics, which is slightly different - between moderates this can be non-ideological (example, legalizing marijuana). But my favourite debates are historical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
redrobin62
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 03, 2012
Age: 50
Posts: 3822
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I could never understand people who argue just for the sake of arguing. Someone will write something and someone else will immediately come along and refute them without exploring any of the facts at all. Sometimes I think arguments, like protests, are futile. An athiest, for instance, could never present his no god beliefs to a believer - and vice-versa. They won't change each other's minds. Pro-life and pro-choice folks have no common ground. For these reasons I'm not a persuasive arguer because people are steadfastly set in their ways. I just go with the flow, agree for the sake of peace, then go on along my merry way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
marshall
Under the whirlwind
Joined: Apr 15, 2007
Posts: 9176
Location: Western Michigan
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| XFilesGeek wrote: | Emotions are at the heart of any and all political debates.
You can say, "Noooooo...all of my political opinions are based on evidence and logic!"
I call bullplop. Politics is nothing more than a bunch of monkeys arguing over who gets the best position at the waterhole. That's it.
Which monkeys you think should get the best position at the waterhole will be based on personal preference, experience, and how you were raised. You'll choose to ignore evidence that contradicts your biases, and instead accuse others of having biases.
I'll "debate" occasionally, but I never think of it as anything other than a silly hobby. |
I couldn't agree more. Then again, I don't really consider myself a "persuasive writer". I'll state my opinions and how I arrive at certain conclusions as clearly as possible, but I have no interest in trying to manipulate people to seeing things my way through clever use of language. I think as long as someone is clear, facts and logic should stand on their own. If I choose to use emotive rhetoric it's not some scheme to hoodwink people into agreeing with me without thinking or questioning. It's just me letting off steam and telling people how I really feel, take it or leave it. I'd rather people reading what I have to say think for themselves. If I present a biased factual picture it's probably unintentional as I don't consider myself a deliberate liar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
glider18
Supporting Member
Joined: Nov 09, 2008
Posts: 6685
Location: Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 10:49 pm Post subject: reply |
|
|
| redrobin62 wrote: | | I could never understand people who argue just for the sake of arguing. Someone will write something and someone else will immediately come along and refute them without exploring any of the facts at all. Sometimes I think arguments, like protests, are futile. An athiest, for instance, could never present his no god beliefs to a believer - and vice-versa. They won't change each other's minds. Pro-life and pro-choice folks have no common ground. For these reasons I'm not a persuasive arguer because people are steadfastly set in their ways. I just go with the flow, agree for the sake of peace, then go on along my merry way. |
This is so true in my opinion. I have debated points in the past, but I was not inluenced and neither was the other. So like I believe you are saying, why bother?
_________________
"My journey has just begun." |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ancalagon
Computer Geek
Joined: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 2387
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| redrobin62 wrote: | | I could never understand people who argue just for the sake of arguing. |
Arguing isn't necessarily heated or mean or obnoxious. There are plenty of people who are real gentlemen/ladies, and are quite chivalrous when engaging others in the art of verbal combat. Even with people who aren't, there can be quite a bit of logical thinking that goes into it, and that by itself is fun.
Some people don't like it, and that's fine. I myself utterly despise licorice and black olives, yet some people actually buy and eat these things on purpose. Different strokes for different folks.
_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ancalagon wrote: | | redrobin62 wrote: | | I could never understand people who argue just for the sake of arguing. |
Arguing isn't necessarily heated or mean or obnoxious. There are plenty of people who are real gentlemen/ladies, and are quite chivalrous when engaging others in the art of verbal combat. Even with people who aren't, there can be quite a bit of logical thinking that goes into it, and that by itself is fun.
Some people don't like it, and that's fine. I myself utterly despise licorice and black olives, yet some people actually buy and eat these things on purpose. Different strokes for different folks. |
you... don't... like... black licorice? 
and i agree with you. debate was how my family communicated when i was growing up. it wasn't negative or emotional.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ancalagon
Computer Geek
Joined: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 2387
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | | you... don't... like... black licorice? |
You can have all of mine.
_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ancalagon wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | | you... don't... like... black licorice? |
You can have all of mine. |
YAY! do you like red licorice? i can trade you.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ancalagon
Computer Geek
Joined: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 2387
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | | Ancalagon wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | | you... don't... like... black licorice? |
You can have all of mine. |
YAY! do you like red licorice? i can trade you. |
If it's at all like twizzlers or red vines, then yes.
_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton |
|
| Back to top |
|
Verdandi
Miss Kitty Fantastico
Joined: Dec 08, 2010
Posts: 10167
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I too hate black licorice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5177
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 6:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| XFilesGeek wrote: | Emotions are at the heart of any and all political debates.
You can say, "Noooooo...all of my political opinions are based on evidence and logic!"
I call bullplop. Politics is nothing more than a bunch of monkeys arguing over who gets the best position at the waterhole. That's it.
Which monkeys you think should get the best position at the waterhole will be based on personal preference, experience, and how you were raised. You'll choose to ignore evidence that contradicts your biases, and instead accuse others of having biases.
I'll "debate" occasionally, but I never think of it as anything other than a silly hobby. |
Maybe that's how you argue politics, but not everyone falls into the same patterns. I know I try to evolve my positions based on new information, different perspectives I encounter, personal growth, etc, though clearly that's not how most people approach the subject. The other thing I try to do is to recognize that while it's impossible to build a personal philosophy completely bereft of personal subjective moral judgments and emotional reactions, that it is possible to minimize the number of them and distill things down to use as few of them as possible. I don't claim to use no emotions or personal morals, just much less of them than most people. Perhaps it's an artifact from my interest in mechanical engineering; the most elegant designs use the fewest moving parts that will still get the job done, and I approach political philosophy the same way.
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
marshall
Under the whirlwind
Joined: Apr 15, 2007
Posts: 9176
Location: Western Michigan
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| If I want elegance and emotional detachment I have to stick to arguing math and science. Politics is inherently messy and too many opinions come down to moral attitudes. Even people who claim to base their arguments on emotionally detached principles just come off as lacking appreciation for what I would consider justice and fairness. I'm far to cynical to take debates traveling in that direction seriously. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
