3 ms·
Just because someone attacks you doesn't mean your hypothesis or arguments should change. If you believe what you say is reasonable then it is not rooted in a p
by scandox 9y ago
Just because someone attacks you doesn't mean your hypothesis or arguments should change. If you believe what you say is reasonable then it is not rooted in a personal animus. That is all I am pointing out.
Often, however, our arguments have a strong unacknowledged bias. When we're challenged the bias becomes more visible.
- sheepmullet 9y ago> Just because someone attacks you doesn't mean your hypothesis or arguments should change In practice that is just not true. Many of my positions are self-moderated by the understanding that smart, kind, and reasonable people have opposing views.
- matwood 9y ago> Many of my positions are self-moderated by the understanding that smart, kind, and reasonable people have opposing views. A great example of this revolves around religion. Many smart, reasonable people are religious. I think a lot of the atheist crowd comes across as complete assholes, which does not help one win in any argument.
- AnthonyMouse 9y agoThere is a difference between challenging someone by exposing the flaws in their argument and challenging them by campaigning to have them fired.
- scandox 9y agoI agree, but that difference would not itself make me change my position.
- AnthonyMouse 9y ago> I agree, but that difference would not itself make me change my position. You're considering things from a formal perspective rather than a practical one. In theory the fact that someone unjustly attacked you should not change your positions on anything, but it may reasonably cause you to stop associating with them. And associating with different people will cause you to hear different arguments, which is likely to change your positions because it changes the ratio of convincing arguments you hear from each side.