previous - archive - next - current

I tend like finding people who have views opposing to my own... just for two reasons: 1) to see where their viewpoint originates from and see if maybe theirs is an argument that is better than my own, in that, if mine has one little flaw, theirs will account for everything mine does, including that flaw... or if there are more flaws... theirs will have less of them, etc... so, just to see who actually does appear to have a more valid/logical argument. and 2) if I'm still totally convinced that my argument is correct, I want to try and pursuade the other person that this is the case. (And then maybe, where they fail to be convinced is where there's a flaw with my argument in the sense that it's either not clear enough, and I just need to clarify, or that there's an actual flaw, and I have to try and find a solution to that)... And I do strongly believe that if I am SO convinced I am right, it will be possible to convince others, or to learn where my flaws are and revise my argument thereby not entirely changing it, but rather expanding on it.

And it seems like almost any issue, I'll be able to debate about... I mean, usually if there's a debate, that means there are clear advantages to both sides of the argument... so, I'll initially be inclined to choose one side... make arguments for it... maybe this leads me to a problem that the other side DOES address... and then I try and find flaws with the other side...and usually, depending on the issue at hand, it might be that one side, with a little more work/revising of the argument "wins"... and with other issues it might be that it's a sort of compromise between the two.. and with other issues it might be that you'll say "it depends" and then say...if such and such preconditions exist, then this side is the "correct" one and if such other preconditions exist, then the other side is "correct"...

And the only reason there is ever the case of opposing views where neither side is capabale of convincing the other that they have a better solution, is that the belief system is different. Or interpretation is... and I believe that a good way to attempt to get around that is to pretend that YOUR belief IS what the other side holds... and from there try to figure out a way to lead yourself to conclude that what your original viewpoint was MUST be true, and not the one you are pretending to believe... without of course resulting to claims about your true belief system...

More formally if you will, this is how I'd say you'd go about making your case:

First, define all important terms. And I mean ALL (so, you can dismiss "he" "she" "is" "the" etc. unless that is a key word that influences the debate ('is' could be possibly iffy... even "the" could be problematic...not so much as a DEFINITION but being clear whether you mean "the" or "a" or "one of the" or something to that effect...)

So, that's one thing... then, once we know what we're actually debating here... you let everyone lay out some key points... things they believe support their view.

Once each side inputs, you can comment on why point(s) the other side made has/have a flaw, or bring up an issue that their side does not account for (and hopefully yours does)... and then they get a chance to criticise your view in a similar fashion.

After this, you can address the issues that were brought up, and either revise your previous point(s) to eliminate flaws, or further expand on your point(s) to explain why the other side is WRONG to claim that it is a flaw... And in the case of things your side does not address, here, ideally, you'd like to come up with a solution and say "well, wait, look, we DO address it"... but if that's not possible, then maybe for now you just say something like 'granted, I cannot seem to account for that particular issue here'... Then they do a similar thing...

And, so, finally, you'll likely see that both sides have their advantages and their flaws... And if possible, it may be pretty clear that one side's flaws are too big for the argument to hold, whereas the other side, that may not be the case... in which case, you will likely adopt the view of the latter side (so yes, you may either change your mind on where you stand or you may stick with your original view)... Sometimes, and I would argue somewhat rarely... you'll be able to use portions of the other sides' argument in order to fix the flaws in your own argument... or, if the other side's argument is significantly superior to yours, you might still adapt portions of yours to improve the other side's view.. again, IF possible. And very rarely you might go "d'oh, I was such an idiot, OF COURSE they're right. How foolish of me to hold the view I did."

And so, it's in the conclusion where we get conflict... because chances are, in reality, most arguments will NOT account for everything, there WILL be some flaws, and I mean, think about it... if one side of an argument clearly accounted for everything and didn't have any flaws, whereas the other side did... no one would hold the belief of the flawed side...

It's just a matter of what each of us sees as the argument that accounts for the most important issues to the argument, and whose flaws are less damaging to the argument.

And now, I wonder... what on earth caused me to go and write so much on how I think we should debate. Likely due to philosophy class partially... the fact that we did discuss this type of thing SORT of... and I was able to see the connection between that, and how I tend to like to debate. And we all know I do love a good debate.

And why is this in my mind today more? Well, one, the topic did sort of come up today in PHIL class...and also, I participated in one of them Psych experiments today, and had to pick a side to some "dilemma" and my partner had the other view and we'd try to come up with a joint conclusion.. an agreement I guess...

We never actually made a decision..but it was clearly going towards what I claimed to be the case... most likely because I was feeling very talkative and in the mood for debate and so I was able to counter almost everything my partner would say... that is, since this was a "moral/ethical dilemma" type issue... whatever she would say is better for your moral self with her view I would find how it can be made into even MORE of a benefit for your moral self... hell, sometimes, while I was talking, I'd notice that some of my arguments had slight flaws... where she could say something and then mine wouldn't sound AS convincing... but I don't think she thought of them (or maybe I just didn't give her enough of a chance to speak, cuz I was on a roll *feels bad* but, if we'd had more time....if she was as into the debate as i was... if if if)...

anyway, yeah, so there were definitely flaws on both sides... there were advantages to both... and while I recognise the flaws in my argument, I still believe that the side I chose was the better choice...

I'm sort of tempted to even say what the question was and make my case... but that'll take up too much space here, I doubt anyone cares about hearing it, and it would reveal which of the two sides my partner chose, and that in a sense would violate the promise that it is all confidential... well, it wouldn't really, cuz *I* didn't make the promise, the people in charge did... but at the same time, I like to respect the fact that I can't know whether she'd appreciate me posting publically where she stands on the issue.. or at least where she did before the discussion. *grins* yeah, I think that maybe just MAYBE she agrees with me now... and that makes me feel like maybe just MAYBE I accomplished something...

yeah, I like to change people's views... I think I'd even take a topic I might not necessarily have much opinion on, and if I can point out the strong arguments and try to point out the flaws in their argument, unless they actually think carefully and point out many flaws w/ my argument where theirs has more of an advantage, then it's easily possible that I'd be able to convince them to change their views. Of course, if they DO have a strong opinion on the subject matter, they'll probably have a better case because if they have such a strong opinion, they probably have it for a reason...

I'll just say this though: the question surrounded a question sort of dealing with... if you're a sign-maker... and someone wants you to make signs for their rally, and you really disagree w/ their view, it goes against your beliefs, and whatnot... and it would really help your business to make the signs... but you don't want to because you'll feel like by doing the signs you're actually helping support something you disagree with... so, what DO you do?

And, I'm not gonna say what I thought for that would imply what my partner thought... although I am now slightly questioning the choice I made, due to a big argument that wasn't brought up at all... probably the base argument in favour of the side I disagree with - and it wasn't brought up... hmm... *goes off thinking*

Actually, I think I've now convinced myself that my original argument is near perfect (the issue that wasn't brought up is still accounted for in my argument, possibly even more effectively)..

Maximum benefits of ANY kind (that are at all relevant to this question) can be achieved through employing the viewpoint I argued for, and only some benefits are met with the other. There might be like... one small advantage to the view I don't hold over my view, but overall, it doesn't come close to being significant in determining overall what the better choice is.

And if anyone IS interested in finding out my personal view on this question, I'm willing to share it w/ specific individuals, but just refuse to post it here publically. So, if you're curious and maybe wanna discuss it, let me know...

Or give me another issue... anything. Give me some time to pick a side I agree with more, form some arguments and then we'll talk. Hopefully we disagree... cuz if we agree, it's like... "yeah, we rock!" lol.

*goes off to sleep surprised at the fact that it's nearly 2:30am and doesn't feel at all tired*

*EDIT* I forgot to mention one thing...two things actually: 1. Yay, today is Zac's 18th b-day! (I say today even though after midnight I should be saying "yesterday") 2. This means I'll be 18 in 3 months and 16 days (or 15 days if you look at the "after midnight" factor)... and, no, I had nothing better to do when I was 11-12 but calculate to the day the age difference between Zac and myself. Now I go sleep, for real.

previous - archive - next - current