It's an extremely common tendency to try and justify ones position on any topic by seeking out those opponents who advance the most naive, the weakest and most ridiculous arguments. Or, when arguing with more thoughtful opponents, to attribute to them a more naive or simplistic position than the one they actually hold and attack that.
In addition it seems that people often appear to deliberately avoid clarity and revel in being abstruse. My suspicion is they do this in order to give the impression of winning the argument. In reality though their words convey little, if indeed, any meaning.
These tactics might rally those who subscribe to your view, but does precious little to justify your own position. What is needed is to seek out those opponents who provide the most challenging and sophisticated arguments, and to address those specific arguments. If you can outargue them and even make them appear to be foolish, then you'll have some confidence that your position might well be correct.
It is though very tempting to simply attack your weakest opponents. Or attack the weakest arguments against your position. Or to employ other underhanded strategies in order to "win". It's easy, requires little thought, makes you feel superior, and of course most importantly of all it garners support and admiration from those who share your sentiments and beliefs in the matter in hand.
I would like to thank the following people for having given me the motivation and inspiration to write the above words. Many of those who have left comments on my blog. Countless hundreds of people I have debated with on skeptic/materialist discussion boards over the years, and a special thanks goes to Paul Edwards who wrote the laughably entitled: "Reincarnation: A Critical Examination".
I thank you all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The myths and traditions of death
An interesting Guardian article : It is worth reminding ourselves that the vast majority of our ancestors saw the world in a very different...
-
Just reading the following article: 20 years ago, we were all set for a Y2K disaster that wasn’t Article says: Patti Duncan stockpiled ...
-
I read this article. * The parents of a boy claims their boy appears to remember being Princess Diana in a former life. It's also cov...
-
I recently read the following article: What the Buddha Didn't Teach About Reincarnation It says: "This is not to say that “we” ...
-
On the 13th January I discovered a lump on my neck. Eventually had an ultrasound and a fine needle aspiration. The lump was 4.2cms long and ...
-
Many philosophers and scientists have some truly bizarre beliefs. The denial of consciousness (as we understand this term) is the most bizar...
-
There's 2 possibilities: a) This is the only life there is. When we die we simply cease to exist. Our lives and the Universe are, in a...
-
According to this article Greenland is the country with the world's highest suicide rate. From 1900-1930 Greenland had a suicide rate ...
-
Someone on twitter/X asked the following question: A mathematician emerges from a cave, hands you the photo below, and asks "Will a c...
-
This is a continuation of the post about my cyst. I think it's sufficiently important to warrant a separate post. After asking many que...
-
It keeps being claimed (eg David Papineau, Sean Carroll et al ) that if consciousness caused anything in the brain over and above physical c...
No comments:
Post a Comment