Towards Better Disagreement

Honest disagreements are often a good sign of progress. DH0: Name call. The slightest form of disagreement that ranges from “You`re fag!!!” to “He`s just a troll” to “The author is a self-important dilettant.” Brooks doesn`t say people stop arguing. It simply offers excellent advice to better contradict. The names of prejudices and errors can help us to notice and correct them, and with labels for different types of disagreements, we can help to widen the parts of a disagreement that are important. It`s a lot of big speeches on my part, like other memes that kick my ass, call me the, and send me for revenge, but I try to focus on those memes that take better care of me. It would be a very boring world if everyone agreed on all issues. Disagreement is normal. We just… [i.g.] must be more than to contradict. Despite his laudable interest in promoting “better disagreement,” Hedges constantly warns his readers against insisting on nurturing religious ideas and identities, when he falls several times into this trap, as when he states that “the answer is right to say that the answer to why religious go to war or that religion is invoked for violent purposes is in fact summed up by one word: politics.” This is, to my knowledge, the definition of essentialism, the assertion that religion is a distinct and clear area that can be marginalized by everyday issues such as politics. While Hedges provides a useful analysis of Christian origins and draws on careful distinctions to show the unknown reader that biblical assertions are based on very wobbly historical ground, he sometimes slips into unfounded assertions, for example when he finds that Buddha died of food poisoning and is “most likely” in favor of the four noble truths. In today`s culture, we all too easily assume that conflicts and disagreements are damaging to us, emotionally and even physically.

Of course, they are not – a contest of ideas improves results, develops resilience and sharpens our thinking. But disagreements must be facilitated in the right way, with a spirit of cordiality and a look at shared goals. Heads of state and government should take the power to foster this type of disagreement. Duncan: What can executives do to help their employees manage their differences of opinion productively? DH4: Counter-argument. Finally, a form of disagreement that could convince! The counter-argument is “opposition plus reasoning and/or evidence.” However, the counter-argument is often on a small point or turns out to be an example of two people passing in front of the other, as in the parable of a tree falling into the forest. Douglas Alexander, a former British politician, hosted a programme for BBC Radio 4, which focused on a better disagreement. He travelled around Britain to understand how people deal with conflict and how they can. Here`s what he had to say: it`s not a statement of disagreement, it`s just a stylistic concern. I understand that it is often a good form to do one`s own work with a quote from a prestigious character. But if that doesn`t interfere too much with our goals, can`t we get used to it with Lesswrong? One of the worst things we can do during a debate or disagreement is to think that we can see into the other person`s soul and know why they have a certain opinion – we can`t.

مقالات ذات صلة

شاهد أيضاً
إغلاق
زر الذهاب إلى الأعلى
إغلاق
إغلاق