P
Pug
Guest
Regarding rationalization, I agree that if someone is clearly rationalizing their own course of action, I am less likely to wish to listen to what they have to say. But it is not rationalizing one’s own course of action when one tries to persuade another to cooperate by offering reason’s other than one’s own.
Say I am soliciting donations for Candidate C, who has a wide platform. I see nothing wrong with several donors donating, even though they are interested in different aspects of the platform. Each of us might be supporting the candidate for different reasons, which seems fine to me. I wouldn’t conceal that Candidate C’s position on say crime is what appeals best to me, however. Maybe I wouldn’t make a great salesman that way.
With what you say about “illusory”, though, I have something else to say. Perhaps you are thinking here of openness compared to cutting off true communion of persons. It is not good to create some fake accord and sit around congratulating ourselves if we could instead achieve a real meeting of the minds or a peace or a solution. But trying to understand the other person well enough to understand what is meaningful to them is not some kind of substitute thing. It is a step to understanding and friendship. Caveat: I do not advocate learning about an individual just to use that info to convince them, like they are some type of mountain to conquer.