Filthy Girl said: Good video. I did know this information already as I have experience doing university level speech and debate, but many should watch this.
This does being to the forefront, what are we arguing about? I would like to pose that question. I would like to know exactly why some users find it so necessary to keep throwing fuel on the fire?
Humor wise if something is a shit show ill literally toss the propane tank on the fire just to see how low some lunatics can go,
after seeing fetlife i think i dont want to know anymore
This is definitely sound advice for how to handle arguments in general. However, I think this guy is grossly oversimplifying the nature of political arguments in today's landscape especially, and I say this as someone who used to feel the same way. I dislike confrontation of just about every form, politics least of all, but when we treat it as merely a "both sides" debate, that's pretty much indifference disguised as "keeping the peace," and it enables the toxic landscape rather than defeating it. Do I believe productive political debates could still be had respectively? Sure. But with politics, you effectively have this: one side insisting that the other is forcing their political agenda on them and that everyone is "too sensitive about everything nowadays" while acting as though "things were better before" and trying to convince people to see things through the lens of one specific demographic, and the other side is "shouting" because things like human rights to live however they choose so long as it isn't harming anyone should not be up for debate, and things like caring for others should not be in question.
I'm just saying, even after understanding what makes a person have certain beliefs, one can still challenge those beliefs if they're inherently problematic. There's only so much "value" in hearing people's prejudices if that other person is not willing to face them and change as a person. People tend to get hostile and defensive when being called out for this (even if it's done respectfully) especially online.
WAMOptimist93 said: There's only so much "value" in hearing people's prejudices if that other person is not willing to face them and change as a person.
Ding ding ding! Change is hard and painful. Self-examination is hard and painful. And instead of teaching people how to navigate the pain and difficulty, our (overwhelmingly right-wing but to some small extent other) leaders are teaching people to blame others and hate the act of reasoning. These are problems that can be overcome, but it ain't easy.
Certainly, we should always be on the lookout for win-wins.
Sadly, this account is also noticeably content-agnostic and power-neutral. These are pretty important things, and horrible defects in an approach to conflict and negotiation.
To spell it out. If I'm negotiating with someone who has no grasp on the facts, and even personally identifies with falsehoods, then any attempted win-win runs a risk of negotiating away things that aren't mine to trade -- namely, facts about how the world is. If I'm negotiating with someone who has vastly more power than I do, I can expect that a relative 'win-win' in the situation may be far less than I am owed by right.
I think most young people are all aware of this approach to politics, and also aware that it doesn't cut it. We're smarter than this, and we need more than clichees.
I've decided not to engage in online debates, and that's something I rarely do. If I do, I set a strict limit to the time I'm willing to engage.
"That random person online really changed my mind!" - No one, ever.
And my mind doesn't work fast enough for IRL debates. If there's a single question, with a single answer, I'm there. But open-ended discussions with non-specific questions and answers leave my mind frozen like a deer in headlights.
piboiva said: "That random person online really changed my mind!" - No one, ever.
I mean, I wouldn't go that far. I've had good conversations with strangers online after which I felt like I'd learned stuff. But it sure does help if you're personally committed to seeking the truth instead of, y'know, whatever else.
I also think you've hit on an important element when you talk about time. If you just want an answer, you can go fast and get out before anything goes very wrong. (This is not to say that people always do that, just that you could do it and still get what you want.) But if you're committed to having a conversation, you sort of have to forget about giving yourself a deadline. Like, it's gonna take as long as it takes, and rushing is only going to make it take longer (or, alternatively, blow up the process completely).
And in part that means you have to be patient with yourself. This is one of the things that Shapiro doesn't talk about in his video, is that you can know your values without having a conversational riposte prepared in advance for any given situation. So there are times when you have to let yourself stumble around a little bit before landing on a reply that you believe in. (And the other people in the conversation have to give you that freedom without trying to bury you for it.) But if you can give yourself that time (and the other people involved don't try to take it away from you), then good things can happen.
Love you, too
