4 ms·
It would be nice if people were logical in their arguments but I've learned over time that logic seldom changes people's minds once they've locked their point
by WheelsAtLarge 10y ago
It would be nice if people were logical in their arguments but I've learned over time that logic seldom changes people's minds once they've locked their point of view. I think that you have to appeal to their emotions to move the argument forward. I guess that's the type of book I'd like to see.
- egwynn 10y agoTragically, I think a pure "appeal to emotions”[1] argument will lead to a fragile victory at best. Emotions are awesome at being irrational (by definition?). Perhaps you could start with emotions and then migration people over to a rationalist perspective? Otherwise you’ll get stuck in the all-too-common emotional “race to the bottom” with anger, fear, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion
- samirillian 10y agoThe way I see it, there are two paradoxes implicit in most (or all) arguments: 1. If the outcome of an argument matters, it matters in the sense that we are emotionally invested in the outcome. The word argument itself implies an inextricably emotional component. 2. Most apparently fallacious arguments boil down to abuses of analogy. But analogy is also, fundamentally, how induction works. Unless the premises of the argument are completely unambiguous (and they rarely are), "rationality" only gets us so far. IMO, the most important part about learning these "fallacies" is learning when they aren't fallacies at all, but actually the best tools we have for grappling with a complex problem, and hopefully arriving at some unexpected clarification.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- smhost 10y agoThe book you're looking for is Julius Caesar by Shakespeare. (Act 3)