You don't know how many times I've made the same points when settling disputes on lists I run (I've run several).
However, I do want to draw one distinction -- in my own defense, since I'm the example here -- If you say A and B, and I say that means C and C isn't, um, totally nice, I think I have a right to say that without violating the spirit of what you're talking about. In the example of our debate, I consider denying rights to a person to be a hostile act. I did not intend -- though that is what it wound up becoming, unfortunately -- an attack on you. I was trying to make the point, initially, that all should be treated equally. So, while I agree that this stuff should never become personal (one of my cardinal rules, which I violated in this case), I do want to clarify that what I meant to say wasn't exactly how it came across, but that doesn't negate the validity of trying to communicate such things. The important thing is to try not to carry grudges, I think, from one debate to another. Because misunderstandings, especially in a topic free environment, are inevitable. H. -----Original Message----- From: Beth Fleischer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 12:26 AM To: CF-Community Subject: The Art Of Debate. You know I just had a revelation about every argument that goes bad here on this group - including this one - and I wanted to point it out to the group because I know that it will happen again. Howard, I am going to use our discussion as an example because its fresh in my mind and I am going to exagerate for the purposes of example, sorry if thats harsh to you. I will be using other examples as well, so don't worry. A discussion about politics about principals about religion is a discussion about those things. When one has an opinion about that or discusses an opinion about it, its just an opinion. It should be responded to like its an opinion, debated, discussed and argued against, for. However, this opinion doesn't really tell you one thing about the person who has it. Well, it does tell you one thing - it tells you that they have an opinion about this subject. So, when I say I think having a school club that is religious is a violation of church and state this may piss howard off, and he may feel inside that I am a horrible prejudiced person (exageration - no offense intended, just illustration) because of it. Thats his opinion too, but it doesnt' really have any place in the discussion. What does have a place in the discussion is why he thinks this isn't a violation of church and state, perhaps giving examples of when there would be a violation of someones rights. And we can debate the fine points until we are blue in the face and maybe learn to see each others points of view a bit better...or maybe not. Instead, what happens often on this list is when someone gets an opinion about me (based on my opinion) he decides to voice his opinion about me, instead of discussing his opinion about the discussion. It turns into a personal attack. I realize its because somehow that this person felt personally attacked because his opinions were being attached, but quite frankly he does himself and his opinion a great disservice by making the argument personal. Opinions are not people - they are simply opinions. If you want to convince me (and others) that my opinion is prejudiced and bigoted the last way to do it is to call me prejudiced and bigoted. Better to say, "well gee, i think your opinion is kind of bigoted and prejudice" and then explain why. THIS is how we have constructive and interesting discussions that can really change people's minds. Once someone is personally attacked and things are said about them instead of their opinions then things go downhill quickly. Its one of the few time I lose my temper (and its the reason I called Corrigan a schmuck ;-) ) - once someone attacks me personally the opinion discussion ceases and it turns into self defense and parry. I also tend to defend others when folks attack them instead of their opinion. Despite the evidence to the contrary, I DO NOT ENJOY THIS AT ALL. I do not. I am however, extremely hung up on principle (i have to laugh, I just typed principal) and I cannot let what I consider injustice drop. Another example I can think of was someone said something to the effect that anyone who supported the war in afghanistan was a war monger and wanted to kill all the women and children there - this really pissed me off because once again it attacked the person and their morals instead of arguing the point on hand. So if all of us could attempt to discuss our feelings about things instead of discussing our feelings about each other, this would be a much nicer place to argue. > Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
