3 ms·

Partial counter argument, or maybe a thing-that-is-also-true: We should expect some people to feel really hurt by a topic, depending on how close it is to them

Partial counter argument, or maybe a thing-that-is-also-true: We should expect some people to feel really hurt by a topic, depending on how close it is to them, even if the wording is civil. For example, it's easy for me to have a civil debate about cross burning, because no one I know has ever had a cross burned in their yard. But I shouldn't be surprised if people who have seen that sort of thing find the debate really really uncomfortable, and maybe even if my comfort with the topic comes across as not having sympathy. So it could be that "XYZ abstract argument about cross burning" is true, and also that talking about it in a dispassionate way is hurtful and rude. I'm not sure exactly what to do in situations like that, but giving 50% or so of the discussion time to acknowledging those feelings seems like a good starting point?

tomschlick 9y ago
> I'm not sure exactly what to do in situations like that, but giving 50% or so of the discussion time to acknowledging those feelings seems like a good starting point? Giving half the time for debate to talk about feelings that are not "debate-able"? Thats probably a waste of time that will derail your debate entirely as people will start debating those feelings.
mcguire 9y ago
One of my friends, who is probably even more of a devil's advocate than I am in my most cynical mood, once got into a discussion about how bad the Nazis is actually were. One of his points: they did a lot of effective engineering (we worked at MSFC, BTW.), and almost all of the people they killed would be dead now, anyway.