3 ms·
It is indeed, a wrong idea. Nevertheless, it is an idea that needs to be addressed, not swept-aside. The same goes with all the other arguments I mentioned. If
by rocqua 9y ago
It is indeed, a wrong idea.
Nevertheless, it is an idea that needs to be addressed, not swept-aside.
The same goes with all the other arguments I mentioned. If we just ignore these and say "There is no possible reason for owning guns" we are essentially arguing in bad faith.
Generally, convincing people isn't helped by immediately dismissing their entire position as trivially wrong and deluded.
- kelnos 9y ago> Generally, convincing people isn't helped by immediately dismissing their entire position as trivially wrong and deluded. Who's doing that, though? Seems like a very small minority of people say "there is no possible reason for owning guns" and then refuses to elaborate when presented with possible reasons.
- rocqua 9y agoDon't open with "there's no possible reason for owning guns". Perhaps open with 'on balance, I think the arguments for gun ownership are far outweighed by the arguments against it'.
- kelnos 9y agoSure. But in that case I'd ask that people on the other side of the debate not open with blatantly absolutist statements as well. Let's not hold the two sides to different standards of argumentation.