How is this possible? How can all sides in every debate want to have a reasoned and rational discussion and yet all claim the 'other side' is irrational and unwilling to discuss?
It seems to me that in every one of our contentious social and political debates each 'side' comes to the debate with a set of assumptions which they are absolutely sure are the correct and in fact only way of framing the debate.
How many times in a contentious debate do both sides get really angry because they say - with some justification - that the other side is putting words in their mouth and are making assumptions about what they think or believe? Both sides claim the other is doing this and both get angry at the way the other side 'distorts' things and doesn't listen.
What I see, is both sides wanting to control how the debate is to be framed.
All sides say they want a rational and reasoned debate but both sides come to the debate assuming that their way of framing the debate, their set of assumptions, are the correct, rational and in fact the only legitimate ones.
Which conveniently mean they - the other side - will soon see the error of their ways, lose the debate and come to see how stupid or misguided they have been.
At which point both sides then feel frustrated that the other side is 'irrationally' sabotaging the debate by avoiding perfectly good questions and insisting of other irrelevant, unconnected, distracting questions.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-25/how-prevent-debate-while-claiming-be-favor-it
It seems to me that in every one of our contentious social and political debates each 'side' comes to the debate with a set of assumptions which they are absolutely sure are the correct and in fact only way of framing the debate.
How many times in a contentious debate do both sides get really angry because they say - with some justification - that the other side is putting words in their mouth and are making assumptions about what they think or believe? Both sides claim the other is doing this and both get angry at the way the other side 'distorts' things and doesn't listen.
What I see, is both sides wanting to control how the debate is to be framed.
All sides say they want a rational and reasoned debate but both sides come to the debate assuming that their way of framing the debate, their set of assumptions, are the correct, rational and in fact the only legitimate ones.
Which conveniently mean they - the other side - will soon see the error of their ways, lose the debate and come to see how stupid or misguided they have been.
At which point both sides then feel frustrated that the other side is 'irrationally' sabotaging the debate by avoiding perfectly good questions and insisting of other irrelevant, unconnected, distracting questions.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-25/how-prevent-debate-while-claiming-be-favor-it
No comments:
Post a Comment