Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have to agree with th e OP. I would like us all to move towards better solutions, realizing that as better information comes in our position may change.
In business, in life we are to grow and be better tomorrow than we were today. It takes diverse views to understand a topic fully and just because they don't agree with you doesn't make them wrong.... and btw there are often more than one right answer.
Once in our political past we had diverse views but once the elections were done we worked together towards the best outcome we could come up with. Conservatives need liberals to keep the humanity in their practices, while liberals need conservatives to keep the practical in theirs. neither side is always correct. The errors we make can cause great harm to others, even loss of life. We need to work towards solutions that benefit all, even those too weak to be heard.
I have to agree with th e OP. I would like us all to move towards better solutions, realizing that as better information comes in our position may change.
In business, in life we are to grow and be better tomorrow than we were today. It takes diverse views to understand a topic fully and just because they don't agree with you doesn't make them wrong.... and btw there are often more than one right answer.
Once in our political past we had diverse views but once the elections were done we worked together towards the best outcome we could come up with. Conservatives need liberals to keep the humanity in their practices, while liberals need conservatives to keep the practical in theirs. neither side is always correct. The errors we make can cause great harm to others, even loss of life. We need to work towards solutions that benefit all, even those too weak to be heard.
I find many posters are just here to ruin any discussion, on any subject.
Even if someone is honestly asking for advice or help with a problem, it is taken as a green light to insult, mock, or hijack the thread. This makes it feel unwelcoming and ruins it for everyone, “discussion ended“.
I have tried to start a number of threads that have not any got replies, I believe due to no one having the inclination to start an argument on the subject.
City-Data themselves, or rather, their Moderators, can also be included with the trouble makers on occasions. I have found that if you are being too reasonable, or even nice, you just don’t fit in, so get infractions against you.
I have also had a number of threads deleted due to the inability of the Moderators to comprehend the reason for the post.
Hostility seems to be the intention.
I have seen the idea expressed in the second paragraph triumph over that of the first, but it is very rare, and seemingly limited to a few distinct forum areas.
I agree. This is why the race-based or "my ideology/party is great and yours sucks" threads explode to so many pages within a few hours/days.
I started a thread yesterday regarding solutions that will make both Democrat and Republicans happy, and the regulars who fight each other in the race and ideology threads all day have yet to comment. Very telling! LOL
After much consideration, I've come to the conclusion that arguments are essentially about power, and as such, truth is not only unimportant, it's irrelevant. This is especially true here on City Data. During an argument each opponent seeks, via debate, to derive energy and power from his adversary. This process is entirely unconscious, emotional, and ego-driven. The ego can be insatiable, and argument is but one of its many avenues for acquiring nourishment. What's more, one can enter into debate armed with the truth, and yet lose the argument to a cunning adversary skilled in the art of semantic subterfuge.
The antidote to mere argument is sincere and earnest intellectual debate. The parties involved must be mature and humble enough to adopt new ideas when proven wrong. The objective should always be the search for truth and its elevation above the pettiness of the ego.
Question:
Do you agree with the above and how often do you see the idea expressed in the second paragraph triumph over that of the first?
Absolutely agree with the paragraph, and not often enough.
Reminds me of the movie Devils Advocate where throughout the movie the devil says that vanity is his favorite sin.
On the bright side, I do not think anyone can participate in these debates without learning something. Even when they are sent scrambling on the net to find backing for their argument, they often run head on into the truth. Overall I think it is one of the most educational activities people can engage in. Beats the hell out of TV anyway.
Absolutely agree with the paragraph, and not often enough.
Reminds me of the movie Devils Advocate where throughout the movie the devil says that vanity is his favorite sin.
On the bright side, I do not think anyone can participate in these debates without learning something. Even when they are sent scrambling on the net to find backing for their argument, they often run head on into the truth. Overall I think it is one of the most educational activities people can engage in. Beats the hell out of TV anyway.
True, yet how many of them actually admit the truth instead of stubbornly holding on to their own argument, resorting to personal attacks, or "disappearing" from the thread?
After much consideration, I've come to the conclusion that arguments are essentially about power, and as such, truth is not only unimportant, it's irrelevant. This is especially true here on City Data. During an argument each opponent seeks, via debate, to derive energy and power from his adversary. This process is entirely unconscious, emotional, and ego-driven. The ego can be insatiable, and argument is but one of its many avenues for acquiring nourishment. What's more, one can enter into debate armed with the truth, and yet lose the argument to a cunning adversary skilled in the art of semantic subterfuge.
The antidote to mere argument is sincere and earnest intellectual debate. The parties involved must be mature and humble enough to adopt new ideas when proven wrong. The objective should always be the search for truth and its elevation above the pettiness of the ego.
Question:
Do you agree with the above and how often do you see the idea expressed in the second paragraph triumph over that of the first?
actually i do and dont agree with you because if you try to argue your point in an intellectual debate if you are on the unpopular opposing side you are ridiculed put down and flamed, so it doesnt matter how intellectual you are it will result in the same thing. on the other hand your right people should debate and not flame or put down or attack everything you do and say just because they dont agree with your view point.
Zeke I hear you but I have some a theory about cause/ effect. I believe this salesmanship mentality bombarding us the last few generations has reached a threshold where everyday language in culture has been altered. People are nearly incapable of speaking to one another as human beings.
After much consideration, I've come to the conclusion that arguments are essentially about power, and as such, truth is not only unimportant, it's irrelevant. This is especially true here on City Data. During an argument each opponent seeks, via debate, to derive energy and power from his adversary. This process is entirely unconscious, emotional, and ego-driven. The ego can be insatiable, and argument is but one of its many avenues for acquiring nourishment. What's more, one can enter into debate armed with the truth, and yet lose the argument to a cunning adversary skilled in the art of semantic subterfuge.
In a culture of winners and losers, the truth is a joke.
Most people will subtly insist they are are right all the time.
Any thoughtful discussion threads usually don't last long. The ones that kick around the longest are the ones that provoke hostile arguments.
Most people are not interested in the truth about anything.
So many good answers here, what the hek do i know.
I feel on City-Data there are many Diverse Threads, and Many Diverse People. Which in turn is going to get many Diverse Views, and Different ideals. No two People will ever think exactly alike, setting off a chain reaction, to what we disagree with.
The Nature of Arguement would be to rightfully find Solutions to the arguement. The purpose of the arguements would be to finding solutions together, and learning something that will benefit each other.
The nature of Arguement is not about who is right or wrong, but the Person in arguement mode, Truly Believing their own Arguement, Right or Wrong, or indifferent. The Person in Arguemental mode, is on Attaack, which in turn gives them a rush, and a feeling of being poweful. Truth is not a factor, but the feeling of being powerful.
Arguing is such a raw emotion, and is driven by Ego and self rightousness, it is extreme Ego-Driven Raw Emotion.
I do truly believe that most people on these threads, right or wrong, or indifferent, do take something away with them, every day we learn something new.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
