Discussion: Is it worth it?

[Lutiferre]

I dont know if any of you have ever had this consideration - but sometimes, I feel that discussion is meaningless. Argumentation can be an ending-less, eternal, pointless, eternally frustrating matter, because it seems the more people the more diversion of opinion, and the more opinions diverge, the more endless and pointless it gets. Its mostly if you are discussing with people that dont agree with you at all. Its more "manageable" when people disagree slightly. If you agree about everything, discussion becomes self-complementary and truly pointless.

But in the end, is it really worth it? I dont know how much time you've used debating in your life, I've used my fair share, both in real life and on the internet.

[Delbáeth]

Yes it is.

[Menydh]

I'm almost sure that you are not totally unaware that much knowledge and culture has been transmitted since ancient through channels such as discussion. And also that discussion, if conducted properly, it is often thought provoking.

On a forum community like this, you get the chance to discuss around a wide variety of topics, some more of your interest and others less so. Or you can use it as a source to access to wide number of old discussions, articles, thoughts and opinions, by a a variety of different people.

And all of this for past events as well as present trends. Or analyses of what's to come. Then you have the possibility of getting into a relaxed, friendly and even entertaining talk, where you exchange jokes or put yours and others' wit to test. Or you have the possibility of engaging on a more serious discussion, about politics, or social and economic trends, while broadening your views because the people involved come from backgrounds which differ on several degrees to your own. Or you can start your own discussion.

The ultimate option is coming soon with the blogs sub-system. Not even soon. They are already configured. I have discussed how the blogs are an excellent option to complement forums discussion, in a way that I think that it is interesting to this very thread. Here: Stirpes Blogs

While I'm writing this, I'm probably one who enjoys it less than others. For the simple reason that in order to keep the forums within a bare minimum degree of quality, I have often to engage in absurd arguments with people who come with their miserable agendas, seeking to destroy or to harm what has taken a long time to build. Fortunately, I've learnt to even turn an argument started ad absurdum, into a discussion of at least a little interest.

And certainly I would rather have a discussion with a real political opponent, than with any of the miserable wasters of the lunatic fringe. It is most unpleasant, but someone has to do it.

The alternative is to isolate yourself, squat on the floor and stay hours looking at the horizon (if you are lucky to have those views, else at a white wall), and rest your head over the palm of your hand while you pretend that you are thinking.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

While I'm writing this, I'm probably one who enjoys it less than others. For the simple reason that in order to keep the forums within a bare minimum degree of quality, I have often to engage in absurd arguments with people who come with their miserable agendas, seeking to destroy or to harm what has taken a long time to build. Fortunately, I've learnt to even turn an argument started ad absurdum, into a discussion of at least a little interest.

And certainly I would rather have a discussion with a real political opponent, than with any of the miserable wasters of the lunatic fringe. It is most unpleasant, but someone has to do it.

This, by the way, is the reason why I've voted for option #2, it is mostly worth it but sometimes it can be a pain. Otherwise I would have voted for option #1.

There are other reason why it is worth it. Or why it will prove worth it in the future. But that's another story.

[Savorgnan]

I'm not only convinced, but it's the truest historical fact, that if the Ancient Greeks were able to achieve such a level of civilization, it was because of their passionate love for discussion. The same could be said for the Renaissance.

[Delbáeth]

Originally Posted by Leipreachán

Yes it is.

Sorry, I should have explained why I believe this.

From personel expierence it has been through debates and healthy discussion that I have been able to learn and grow, as I am sure other people have expierenced the same.

[Weltschmerz]

To get diverse opinions is part of the point, especially when many people participate. Discussion shouldn't be "manageable". Even if I know I'm right, I try not to take the point to buffoonery. In one to one chatting, consensus can give you the feeling that you're not alone, but to always want consensus will leave you dissatisfied, in my opinion, because real consensus is rare. Especially in group conversation, it is very rare.

Discussion is one of my favourite hobbies, and I think it's more than worth it. I learn an immense lot of things from other people, both about life and about a lot of other things. Conversation is a truly human activity.

[Routasydän]

If you go into the discussion with the objective to convert unbelievers to the word of truth, then yes, discussion rarely changes minds, I've noticed. However, you will get confirmation for your own world view, as you arguments are countered with the same age-old ad hominems and guilty-by-association tactics often employed by our opponents. You will test the strength of their arguments and can see for yourself what they amount to, whether there is something you need to change in your thinking.

[Agrippa]

It depends on the issue and persons in question, as well as on other factors involved. F.e. one agent provocateur can destroy and otherwise constructive discussion by making a debate "heat" in an irrational way.

For some issues there can be no meaningful discussion since the positions are clear and there are arguments for both - so it will be rather a list of arguments for either case, either parties, enemies and end with insults. This might be, however, be helpful and interesting for those not involved in that debate so far.

And not to forget, in many cases you dont know how it ends when it begins. I had discussions with people which ended surprisingly constructive and friendly and others which I thought about being rather harmless first ending in a rather "harder way".

I voted for No. 2.

[gazumpiro]

With each discussion you learn a little bit more about the world and those who live in it. Each discussion leaves you a little bit more prepared to meet the next day.

[Lutiferre]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

If you go into the discussion with the objective to convert unbelievers to the word of truth, then yes, discussion rarely changes minds, I've noticed. However, you will get confirmation for your own world view, as you arguments are countered with the same age-old ad hominems and guilty-by-association tactics often employed by our opponents. You will test the strength of their arguments and can see for yourself what they amount to, whether there is something you need to change in your thinking.

Yes, I can recognize that, but especially with subjects one is especially confident in. When having discussed the same issue with a number of people, you start being able to predict their next false argumentation tactic. Its just sad that discussion has become so "tactic", there are many occasions where whether or not you use some argumentation tactic decides whether people think you are right or wrong.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Lutiferre

When having discussed the same issue with a number of people, you start being able to predict their next false argumentation tactic.

This appears to assume that everyone who you are going to argue with, is going to use a priori, a false argument against you.

A worrying thought.

[M.R.]

I don't really understand this.. Worth of what? Your efort? Time?

Anyway I guess it depends of situation, you can probably never change other person views in some simple debate, you can however, by backing your claims, providing arguments, etc. strenghten the views of other people who have simmilar beliefs and happen to be listening/reading to what you're debating. For example, you see on internet or you listen in real life to some debate and you can always learn different things from people with simmilar views like yours, see what kind of arguments they use etc. Usualy I don't even bother with other people, I do that for myself and people with simmilar ideology.

[Lutiferre]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

This appears to assume that everyone who you are going to argue with, is going to use a priori, a false argument against you.

A worrying thought.

No, definitely not. I have had a good deal of good discussions through time, without the usage of such false argumentation. However, my point was that we all have topics we are especially confident in, like I said, where we are able to predict the usage of argumentation tactics. I only say this because its my experience that many are willing to use any argumentation tactic to feel they have been given "right" or won the discussion. But that does not mean that it is true with everyone, or that we can expect anyone to do so. That would be very cynical, and also imply the presumption of always being right.

Originally Posted by M.R.

I don't really understand this.. Worth of what? Your efort? Time?

Worth whatever effort, time and brain activity you spend on it. Especially the time and energy put into thinking and consideration. (if the time you use to debate sums up to 5 minutes per year, then that effort is, of course, very little)

[Marcus Marulus]

Yes, it is worth it.