Coercive argumentation

At this moment I am completely uninterested in coercing people to believe against their will answers to question they have no interest in asking. For me there is no pleasure in conversation where the other party is interested primarily in how my points can be invalidated.

I am not saying that debate is useless. Some people enjoy siege and defense, and plenty of real good can come of it. But if you keep your house locked up and rain down arrows and pour molten lead on the head of everyone who comes knocking at your door, this will narrow the range of guests joining you at your dinner table.

*

Perhaps some of the best truths must be invited in before they can be known. What basis is there to accept as true only ideas that can overpower your best intellectual defenses?

*

For a debater truth is that which wins debates.

Leave a Reply