2 ms·
> The author also goes into political and moral arguments and starts taking sides. Is this per se a cause for reduction in credibility? What's wrong with maki
by jMyles 8y ago
> The author also goes into political and moral arguments and starts taking sides.
Is this per se a cause for reduction in credibility? What's wrong with making political and moral arguments and taking sides?
- PunchTornado 8y agoper se, nothing is wrong, but, you are more inclined to disregard the other side. you're not presenting all the possible arguments for the other side. I find it less trustworthy if someone is taking sides..
- jMyles 8y agoIf someone is taking the position that the sky is blue, arguing against the position that the sky is orange, does that make them less trustworthy? How about arguing against genocide? How about arguing that torture is morally indefensible? How about arguing that war is wrong and best avoided unless absolutely necessary? How about arguing that drug prohibition is an abhorrent policy that is rooted in racism and greed? Any one of these positions makes a presenter more credible, not less. These are all accurate, true positions; there is no trust deficit inherent in pointing that out.
- PunchTornado 8y agoarguing those things is sort of useless. we are referring to more debatable aspects or society: left vs right, religion is fake news? etc.