There are around three ways I generally see arguments
progress in the culture around me, and none of them seem to really produce
anything useful. The first kind are the kind of arguments had when two people
who already agree with each other get to talking about a subject, and in order
to affirm their own opinions feel the need to argue against a theoretical
person who disagrees with them. For instance, as a young college aged person I
encounter a lot of people with the same political views. As a result of this
anytime an election or political policy is brought up it tends to give rise to
an echo chamber of ideas in which people argue against no one and hear their
own ideas back. This results in people feeling like they’re arguing their ideas
and having them critically reviewed, when in fact the person they are talking
to is unlikely to be very critical because both people already agree. In this
situation people never really learn anything because they aren’t being
presented with well thought out arguments against them. This isn’t to say that
people in the culture around me don’t have any legitimate arguments at all, however
many of these arguments are also of the second type which end just as they get
going. The culture of a college campus
is very oriented towards being inoffensive and this leads to many people being
more willing to back down and diffuse an arguments before become too
confrontational. So when controversial social issues related to race, gender,
religion, economics, etc. the conversation often peters out as soon as people
start to cement themselves in opposing opinions so as to not cause trouble or
discomfort. The final way that I see
arguments progress around me is the more traditional, but still ultimately
futile way. These are the more intense arguments in which people staunchly
disagree and argue with only the goal of proving themselves superior in mind. When
I see two students arguing between the traditionally republican and the
traditionally democratic stances on an issue this is the way things usually go.
Both sides begin the argument already so incensed that they would never admit
to losing the coming debate, and will dogmatically deny any arguments presented
to them that risk undermining their current opinion for the sake of self-esteem.
People are usually in these types of arguments to have themselves proven right,
instead of arguing to have their ideas critically evaluated and to do the same
for others. There are surely some productive arguments that take place around
me, but they are sufficiently scarce to leave the impression that arguments in
the culture I see don’t tend to produce anything useful.
So you're saying that if people's arguments are well thought out, then they'd be arguments? Can you elaborate why you believe arguments are unhelpful?
ReplyDelete