It actually makes sense to me.
Imagine for a moment that you believe that
Jane Eyre is the be all and end all of literature and I believe that
Tom Sawyer holds that distinction. Naturally, to save you from your misconceptions, I want to change your mind. Now I could pull out all the great things about Twain’s work to prove that he is a much better writer, or I could show you the weak spots of your favorite.
If I use your book to discredit your belief, it shows sevearl things. I have studied
Jane Eyre to the point of knowing where it is lacking. I respect your point of view to the point of studying the book you think is so great. I have come to the conclusion that it is not as good as mine. I am willing to show you its weak points.
Another analogy: you like shrimp and I like steak. I could tell you that steak tastes better, or I could point out that shrimp is rubbery and stinks. I could show you all the great ways to prepare steak, or I could remind you that shrimp eat the waste of other sea animals.
In either scenario, I am sowing the seeds of interest and sparking questions in your own mind. I don’t absolutely have to get you to agree that my way is right, just get you to admit that your way is wrong. Then I can work on showing you the beauty of my own book or the savor of my favorite meat.
Just a note: We can use the same methods to spread Catholicism.
