Friday, 31 October 2014

Arguing

I love arguing. I really do. Don't get me wrong, I don't like confrontation or fights (they make me unhappy), but arguing points entertains me, distracts me and I find it's a phenomenal way of getting to know how people's minds work. It also happens to be a fantastic way of winding people up (especially because I am a terribly bad arguer and I will argue one side of a point today and the opposite tomorrow, and I like to be convinced by people of things, and sometimes I know that I'm wrong but refuse to admit it; but most of the time because people get annoyed when they realise they don't have a good argument for what they're defending and/or because even if their argument is good it does not answer the criticism they are receiving).

This said, I believe certain rules should be followed when arguing (this is not to say I follow them), because otherwise arguments can become violent and personal and cease being fun.

First of all, it's important to take the argument seriously. This involves two things: take the subject being discussed seriously and take your opponent seriously. This doesn't mean be solemn, or don't make a joke. It does mean don't insult your opponents intelligence (unless you really have to) and be knowledgeable about the subject and your limitations when discussing it. It doesn't matter whether the subject is science policy in Eastern Europe in the 1990s or whether Harry Potter and Hermione should have ended up together (if you are an HP HG shipper get out of here, it was never gonna happen).

Secondly, and something I'm terribly bad at, be honest. If the other person is right, admit they are right. If your argument had a logical fallacy, admit it. Neither of these things have to end the debate and they contribute to people not getting exasperated (or, in other words, slamming their pint glass in anger before getting up and leaving).

Thirdly, and this is the one where the real meat is, don't get into arguments you can't win. By this I don't mean arguments where you are arguing the losing side (that can be fun) but arguments with people who have such a clear mindset on the subject that they don't see the point of the discussion. Internet forums are a perfect example of this. Most of the time, the people who comment in these forums are just there to show off their opinions, they are not interested in discussing things, or in learning, or in seeing someone else's point of view or even someone else's reasonings. Arguing with these people is pointless, not because they won't change their minds, but because generally they won't see any point in trying to explain why they think the way they think or in trying to convince you to think like them. Most of the time they will consider you an idiot for thinking differently or have bigoted views on your opinions.

I don't have any more rules for arguing. I disagree with making arguing too complicated (well, I love debating, but I think that's one of the simplest and most beautiful forms of arguing), and I won't to add any rules about listening, not interrupting, etc. (because I think it's sort of part of being engaged in a debate to be a bit agitated, and occasionally interrupt, and say "I'm sorry" when it happens and keep going, because if you are engaged you are listening and just wanting to make your point).

I sometimes wonder whether other people I know like arguing. I know a couple of people who get slightly annoyed for my love of discussing stuff for no other reason than to have an argument, these also happen to be the people I talk with the most and have the most discussions with, so fair enough. But I am surprised at some people's dislike of argument, of intelligent discussion, even for the sake of intelligent discussion. Personally, I just see it as a fantastic way to pass the time.

1 comment:

  1. Arguing is great when there's an opportunity to learn something or to teach something. My views have been shaped a lot by introductions to new concepts or authors, usually by someone who has spent more time thinking about that argument than myself. There's no point in circle-jerking or talking to a brick wall though.

    I particularly like arguing with books, some of the best philosophers have a writing style that talks to you, makes you challenge what they write on one page, before answering that on the next. I love being taken through a thought process by a guy who died 300 years ago :)

    Probably the only 'rule' that I observe is that people have different axioms. With that in mind, the fad of linking to "your logical fallacy" often doesn't have much meaning, as there's no logical foundation to the discussion anyway. So what are we there for? To show someone that their argument is logically inconsistent with their axioms? To find a common set of axioms and a proof? Or to try and convince each other than our axioms are better? The answer to that really drives my approach.

    ReplyDelete