What happened to a good argument?

[meltzerboy2]

What happened to a good argument? The same thing that has happened to virtually everything else in our society and world, including quality of the arts, craftsmanship, institutions of all kinds, and civility itself: all have deteriorated and continue to do so. Many reasons for this, but no denying it has happened, especially if one has some historical perspective and can make comparisons.

Next question…

 

[catholiclala]

People don’t understand nuance and see in black and white. This is why so many debates never go beyond conservative vs liberal, believer vs non-believer, etc, etc. The polarization has only grown worse because of the extreme media coverage of any and everything do to social media. Think about it, it is easier to decide what story to tell if you just go with a narrative that supports either end of the spectrum and let the chips fall where they may. It’s lazy on the part of the content maker and the audience. I’m neutral on all issues until proven otherwise. Most people can’t handle that and don’t want to truly look at all sides of anything. They just want to side with the ideal they have bought into.

 

[27lw]

Often people say “I’m out” because they didn’t wish to engage in an argument. But if someone wants to think the person saying “I’m out” lost the argument and feel smug about it, then that’s on them - they can answer to the Lord for their prideful assumptions.

I just think the use of the term “I’m out” or “muting this thread now” is funny. Like everyone is hanging on their every word…

 

[Ralph]

All very good points. The media has certainly not helped. The polarization of our country has , I believe, caused a real decline in any real discussion in depth of issues. I have a friend,yes a friend,who is very conservative. I consider myself on a progressive side. He always describes people like me liberal elitists. It’s difficult to engage him on the points of conservative philosophy vs a progressive(liberal)philosophy. Both have merit in my opinion. So any issue that comes up he immediately just gives me “oh no that’s just liberal hogwash” . It goes both ways. It’s reached the point where cable news very seldom has guests on that may have a view differing from station management edict. We know longer vote for people we vote against people. On the Spiritual side many think arguing is almost unChristian. Well what is apologetics about? So we tend to “fellowship” with only those we agree with or people who don’t talk about anything that might require a discussion that goes further than a amen party.

 

[CelticWarlord]

when people here on CAF lose their argument and announce “I’m out"

At times that can just mean, 'I surrender’.

 

[Lara]

Most people have made up their minds, or have permitted the state brainwashing to stick, so there is little point for them to hear your opinion.

Many people avoid conflict, or only relish it when they’re doing the bullying.

 

[Annie]

At times that can just mean, 'I surrender ’.

You can take it that way, but I generally see it as: you are not listening to me, so what is the point of continued effort on my part to respond?

I generally see it after the person writing it has repeatedly had his or her words twisted, etc.

 

[whatistrue]

You can take it that way, but I generally see it as: you are not listening to me, so what is the point of continued effort on my part to respond?

I generally see it after the person writing it has repeatedly had his or her words twisted, etc.

I am often reminded of the scene depicted below…:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

…and the follow up of “Some people you just can’t reach”.

 

[CelticWarlord]

you are not listening to me, so what is the point of continued effort on my part to respond?

I’m sure that’s the case in a majority of circumstances.

 

[fredystairs]

I think that it is part because students these days are not taught to think. They take whatever is fed them and don’t THINK as to whether that position can be justified. Also, as others have said, they are not taught to write, to frame an argument or do research on both sides of an issue. So when they no longer can respond to their opponent’s argument, they start the ad hominem attacks. That, I think, is the clearest indication that they’ve lost the argument, they resort to attacks instead of arguments.

(As an aside, several years ago I took a history class at my local community college. One of the assignments was a research paper on a topic. I hadn’t done one in a long time, so I had to take an old English book that I had to look up how to do footnotes. When I got the paper back, at the bottom of the second page, was this note: “Alleluia, someone who knows how to do footnotes.” The professor told me that many students straight out of high school could not do footnotes.)

Pax

 

[ATraveller]

So, I ask, what ever happened to a good argument? Surely, even 50 years ago, despite all the troubles of that time, one could at least have engaged in a meaningful and civil argument. What happened?

Too many feel someone disagreeing with them is somehow a personal attack.
Then there are some who completely ignore what others have said and just repeat themselves over and over asking for “proof”. If there isn’t an agreement, there isn’t an agreement. They act as if things can be settled once and for all on some Internet forum. This is the most obvious on separate threads weeks apart on the same topic where the same people just post the same demand for proof, etc when the previous thread already contained them.

 

[MNathaniel]

My favorite is when people here on CAF lose their argument and announce “I’m out”. That always makes me smile.

So long as you don’t make the uncharitable assumption (an unhealthy and immature habit of mind) that each time someone says “I’m out” and leaves, that suggests they “lost their argument”. It’s context dependent. Walking away may sometimes happen if someone feels they’ve lost an argument and is embarrassed and trying to save face; however, at other times walking away is the only wise thing to do, e.g. if those who remain seem unwilling or incompetent to engage in a discussion calmly, charitably, or rationally.

Someone who sticks around to “argue” with someone who is unwilling or incompetent to argue well, would be wasting their time (and sanity). Better to go outside and garden, walk the dog, read to the baby.

 

[StudentMI]

Well said. Sometimes it’s pearls before swine, the way I look at it.

 

[fredystairs]

Further to my comments above, I came across an article from Christendom College’s publication “Principles” that I made a copy of. I apologize but I only have a copy of a single page so I cannot tell you the name of the article or the date. Here is the section I thought is relevant:

“However, in order for citizens to think for themselves, they must actually be taught how to think. To do that, they must be taught philosophy. In order to be taught philosophy, they must be taught logic. In order to understand logic, to have a logical argument, to reach a conclusion and defend a conclusion, they must be able to articulate an idea. In order to articulate, they must be taught language. If English is their language (or even if Spanish is their language) to better understand and use their language, they really should be taught Latin, which is the foundation of their language. And since about 30% if English is based upon Greek, they would do well to study Greek, too. As Chesterton says: “Greek is of all things most essential to a democracy, the very name of which is Greek. And the early history of democracy is all in Greek, while the early history of aristocracy is partly in Phoenician and other languages fortunately lost foe ever.””

I would submit that a public education does not cover most of the above.

Pax

 

[RobertAdams]

Different people enjoy different things in argumentation. Being quite dense, I appreciate having my questionable points totally obliterated and being personally called out on the implications of holding them… when someone is successful it’s this amazing feeling like a new avenue for more accurate information has been suddenly cleared in my brain.
Learning that this approach is highly aversive to almost everyone and very prone to error has been a life long work in progress.

(in short arguments with me would have never have been good ones, even when people used to have them).