4 ms·
No, neither. “He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he
by Pinegulf 6y ago
No, neither.
“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion... Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them...he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
ref: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/66643-he-who-knows-only-his-own-side-of-the-case https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/66643-he-who-knows-only-his...
- ben_w 6y agoPolitics is the mind-killer. Even those of us who wish to be rational and practice rationalism, suck at applying the methods of rationality to politics by default. I don’t have a magic-wand solution to this (and I’d be surprised if such a solution exists), but we’ve just witnessed what happens if you let people argue endlessly in bad faith without consequence, and what happened was not good. Perhaps your way is the least-bad outcome overall? I wouldn’t know, but you do not appear to have made that argument.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]