14 Dec 2020, 8:26 am
magz wrote:
I witnessed a debate between two professional philosophers and it didn't feel any different from two uncles arguing politics over a holiday's meal. The same stubbornness in trying to force one's point and not listening to the other.
I think it's a case that if someone's into their beliefs too much that's what happens, regardless of if it's politics or philosophy.
Just most people see themselves as political experts so the only real hope of a civilised conversation on politics is listening to a couple of kids who just discovered politics.
Heck even that got taken away from me as a kid
As an afab kid, I admired Thatcher cos she was a woman who did well in politics. That was seen very badly by my dad's friends...
14 Dec 2020, 9:38 am
magz wrote:
I witnessed a debate between two professional philosophers and it didn't feel any different from two uncles arguing politics over a holiday's meal. The same stubbornness in trying to force one's point and not listening to the other.
Most competitive debates are like this. The objective is not necessarily to win the opposition over to your side, but to score "points" for data, reasoning, presentation, conclusion, and lack of fallacies."The subject is 'Vegan Diets for Domestic Cats'. The Blue Team has won the toss. They have chosen 'Pro', leaving 'Con' as the default for the Red Team..."
Ahh... high school...
14 Dec 2020, 10:25 am
