• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Do you argue to win or to lose?

I just believe in pushing my limits..

Everyone always has an opinion on something.. so it should be brought up in the public theatre.. to debate and come to terms and understanding
 
I think that good arguments happen when one of the arguers can honestly admit they lost.. or didn't see something in that particular light before..

So that both people can come to terms we need both sides to tell the truth..

Lying gets annoying in an argument..

I commend anyone to bring up what ever they are interested in arguing about.

It can be brave to honestly voice your opinion.. and having an open mind enough that you can distinguish between right and wrong..

So the closed mind is closed and has attained closure when the truth is told to the T.

The idea of a closed mind is only valid if its being 100% truthful.
 
Brendan12 said:
I just believe in pushing my limits..

Everyone always has an opinion on something.. so it should be brought up in the public theatre.. to debate and come to terms and understanding
Click to expand...
Many issues are seen as hate issues and they are being censored.

I mostly focus on moral and ethical issues. I am nobody and am censored quite a bit.

Regards
DL
 
Brendan12 said:
and having an open mind enough that you can distinguish between right and wrong..
Click to expand...

That factor disappears when dealing with the religious.

Their tribal natures override their moral sense and ethical actions. Homophobia and misogyny being two good examples of this vile double moral sense.

At the political level, not that I want to deflect, we saw the same thing at work when the Reps publicly held their noses, and still do, while following Trump.

Tribe over common moral sense is a curse. Look at what it has done to Christians.

Regards
DL
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
Do not fear to learn from the enemy. Embrace the notion.

You cannot defeat what you do not know.

Atheists usually kick religious butt thanks to that trait.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...

No. I don't have to accept everything and I don't have to passively listen to immoral people. It's called boundaries.
 
Ok, I agree Gnostic Bishop..

So now we know the herd mentality is greater than the moral imperative how do we go about changing this?

Maybe humanity needs to evolve to be 100% moral?

I'd rate us at about 65% moral..

Good question: is moral truth the same as being honest(telling the truth)?

So when we have to lie about what were doing, for example drug use.. it creates a kind guilt complex for doing something (drug use).

I'm asking how can we expect to be moral when we have to lie for our own inner and outer security?
 
I don't argue to win or lose.

I argue to test my knowledge as well as learn about the counterargument.
 
Foreigner said:
No. I don't have to accept everything and I don't have to passively listen to immoral people. It's called boundaries.
Click to expand...

It is not the listening to them that is our duty.

Correcting them is.

Why do you think I get warned so often or why Jesus had to run for his life so often?

It ain't easy being enlightened.

Regards
DL
 
Not really, though that question is confusing since I don't get your contextual aim.

But yeah, I don't really change my mind. Learning and then changing/modifying what I know isn't defined as changing my mind.
 
Brendan12 said:
Ok, I agree Gnostic Bishop..

So now we know the herd mentality is greater than the moral imperative how do we go about changing this?

Maybe humanity needs to evolve to be 100% moral?

I'd rate us at about 65% moral..

Good question: is moral truth the same as being honest(telling the truth)?

So when we have to lie about what were doing, for example drug use.. it creates a kind guilt complex for doing something (drug use).

I'm asking how can we expect to be moral when we have to lie for our own inner and outer security?
Click to expand...

I do not think we can have our selfish gene back off.

It, as our primary life guide, want to live more than it wants to be moral. The herd is security. No lie required.

All we can do is mitigate harm.

We are getting a lot better at that. Just check all the stats for evil. They look great. Watch for a did though with climate change negative stats.

We naturally default to doing good, thanks to our selfish gene and I do not think it would be a good idea to slow our forward progress by too much interference with nature. We are doing quite well. Don't touch.

Regards
DL
 
Kl519 said:
Not really, though that question is confusing since I don't get your contextual aim.

But yeah, I don't really change my mind. Learning and then changing/modifying what I know isn't defined as changing my mind.
Click to expand...
To not ever change your belief in a thing indicates that every thing you have learned has been correct.

I wish many could say that.

Regards
DL
 
How so? It could indicate many other things as well.

Not really to that either. To get everything correct is a goal not even worth achieving. There is too much us humans do not know. Not changing your mind can signify that you know what you're doing, or there aren't regrets, and what else can you think of yourself? There are a lot of ways to go about this subject, but I'm not in the mood to talk too much right now. I'm aware that you have your own mind to consider whatever you might want from this post.

I laugh at that thought. I have made a ton of judgment errors before, although that was like walking in the dark for a few years, I ended up getting a lot right enough to get back on track. I definitely do not get everything correct.

These are simply my thoughts.
 
Kl519 said:
How so? It could indicate many other things as well.

Not really to that either. To get everything correct is a goal not even worth achieving. There is too much us humans do not know. Not changing your mind can signify that you know what you're doing, or there aren't regrets, and what else can you think of yourself? There are a lot of ways to go about this subject, but I'm not in the mood to talk too much right now. I'm aware that you have your own mind to consider whatever you might want from this post.

I laugh at that thought. I have made a ton of judgment errors before, although that was like walking in the dark for a few years, I ended up getting a lot right enough to get back on track. I definitely do not get everything correct.

These are simply my thoughts.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this.

I noted some contradictions and think we are closer than you think, but respect your mood.

One thing, if I may.

A kudos for you knowing that it is indeed about our self image.

Regards
DL
 
i support the view that if there is someone that is so good at arguing, that anyone who argues with him dies, then that person would be considered cool.
 
If i know im right, ill just ignore the other person.

If i know im wrong, ill start asking lots of questions.

If it's up for debate, and there is no right answer, which i find to be the best "arguments", i like to at least understand where the other person's head is at so i can try looking at it through a different lense.

Definitely more interested in opposing arguments than my own. I don't know shit about lots of things.

Oh, right, GB is temp banned. Shame.
 
I debate to win but I discuss to achieve a state of mutual understanding and agreement. In a debate I would wilfully sidestep, ignore, or invalidate the points made by my opponent in order to advance my own.

However, it’s important to remembet that debates or to convince the audience not your opponent. You win when the audience accepts your argument over your opponents.

If someone has an open mind or desire to achieve greater knowledge I enjoy discussing things. In this scenario I kind of suspend my opinions about the topic in order to understand the other disscussants perspective and make mental space for them to convince me with evidence and argument.

Discussions only work when both parties adopt this approach to a greater or lesser degree.

I never get into arguments. Not ever. Once I detext the other person is rigid in their views I walk away. The exception may be in an online forum where I may make a couple of post unpicking some particularly evil, stupid, or dangerous post made by someone on an issue I care about.

However, while it looks like I an responding to that poster I am not. I’m trying to ensure other readers are made aware of the falsity of what they have posted. So in that sense it is like debating as explained above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top