There is a technique of debate which consists of pointing out apparent
inconsistencies or contradictions in what another writes, and then
inferring from these some major flaw in the other's argument. Yet often
such apparent inconsistencies are just that: apparent and not real.
One who wants to learn from the writing of others, as distinct from trying
to find out what is wrong with it so as to discredit the other writer, will
look at apparent contradictions as resulting from incorrect interpretation
of what was written, and will not easily assume that the contradictions are
inherent in the writer's world view.
There is another technique of debate which consists of attacking the chosen
opponent as biased, perhaps with a conflict of interest, and narrow-minded.
A sign that this technique is being used is that the sole evidence of bias
that has any basis in truth is that the opponent is advancing a different
opinion than that of the debater.
I once rode in a car with Charles Manson. He had decided that he needed me
to join his group, and he needed it so badly that he was willing, he told
me, to give "everything" to me. I did not fall for it. How did I know not
to trust him? (He hadn't murdered anyone yet, as far as I know, he did not
seem all that dangerous.) Well, for one thing, he clearly did not know
himself. To bring the kind of thing that he did into relevance here, he
would have said something like
"I'm not debating, I don't like to debate" when he was, without any doubt,
using debate techniques, attributing false views to opponents, charging
them with contradictions which are actually not relevant, attacking them as
biased without presenting any clear evidence of that, and generally
demonstrating that he does not understand what is said to him, but has his
own internal agenda.
Don't think that any accusations are being made here that, somehow, a
participant here is like Charles Manson. Except perhaps in one way, a lack
of self-knowledge (which is, perhaps, a charitable interpretation). It is
not only common but it is also remediable. If....
And if I am wrong in what I think I see, so what? I've been wrong before,
won't be the first time. But....
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
