The View from Hell

Just another WordPress.com site

Archive for the ‘politeness’ Category

Why Engage in Rational Argument?

with 8 comments

The very wise Robert Todd Carroll, author of the Skeptic’s Dictionary, made my day with an insightful essay (DEFINITELY worth reading in its short entirety) about the purpose of critical thinking and rational argument in a world where our interlocutors rarely seem to value those things. Arguments, online and in meatspace, are often emotionally difficult and seemingly counterproductive; no one ever seems to change his mind, so why bother?

Carroll’s reader laments:

I . . . find it frustrating and upsetting when people make me feel I’m wrong or crazy when I, very diplomatically, describe a more rational, objective, or philosophical explanation, when other people follow irrational paths.

Carroll correctly notes that rationality, the practice of critical reasoning, is a very unnatural mode for humans – it’s not what we evolved to do. Valuing truth above one’s own interests is hardly evolutionarily beneficial behavior. And people don’t tend to admit that you’ve changed their minds.

But, Carroll says, rational argument has several major purposes, even if it doesn’t seem to change anyone’s mind: first, argument benefits us directly by promoting our own truth-seeking function:

It is pleasurable to seek out the best evidence available and construct the best argument possible. It is pleasurable to explore a strong argument that goes against what you believe. Either you find weaknesses and fallacies in the argument (strengthening the confidence in your conviction) or you realize the error of your ways. Either way, you benefit. Examining arguments, especially arguments that seem counterintuitive, is the only way we can arrive at the most reasonable beliefs possible.

Mostly, though, argument serves the purpose of (a) potentially changing an observer’s mind (especially important for web arguments), (b) changing an interlocutor’s mind later, when face-saving is no longer an issue; and (c) figuring out whether we ourselves might be wrong. Carroll says:

The dynamics of changing minds are complex, but I hope for two things by confronting the errors of others in a public forum: I hope they will later reconsider their views in light of the evidence and arguments I present, and I hope others who are not directly in the fray, but who are interested in the subject and interested in getting it as right as possible, will read the discussion and see that I have the better evidence and arguments. I also remain open to the possibility that I might be wrong and that some observer will provide me with the evidence and argument to show me the error of my ways.

Take heart, fellow antinatalists and other thought criminals.

Advertisements

Written by Sister Y

August 12, 2010 at 5:26 pm

Polite Conversation about Children

with 3 comments

A commenter “Elle” on a blog called ginandtacos points out that, while it’s socially acceptable to inquire into someone’s reasons for NOT having children, many of the likely reasons are not polite to mention, such as:

3. I’ve had four miscarriages, and I feel like my heart is breaking in my chest when I think about having another one.
4. My partner and I are both Tay-Sachs carriers, and the risks seem too great.
5. When you had a child you became so boring and self-involved that I shudder to imagine that happening to me.
6. I don’t know how I could have a child and keep them safe from their grandpa, without moving away.

I would also note that it is NOT socially acceptable to inquire into someone’s reasons for HAVING children (found that one out the hard way).

Written by Sister Y

July 19, 2010 at 8:34 pm