Thursday, May 16, 2002
What cannot be proved, it's futile arguing over.
A lot of arguments are intellectual vapourware. Chewing gum for the mind.
I have had many arguments over the years -- with friends, family, colleagues... acrimonious ones, reasonable debates, friendly banter -- and rare have been the occasions when I have been convinced of the other person's viewpoint, and rarer still occasions where I have managed to convince the other person of my viewpoint.
I doubt whether opinions change simply in the face of a forceful argument. Opinions change if they are based in ignorance, and facts bear them out to be wrong. Opinions change if our own experiences go to the contrary. Opinions change if events influence them.
If you have very strong opinions on issues, unless any of the three factors above change them, it's unlikely that any amount of arguing is going to make a difference.
Oh sure, we all have an open mind. Our open mind, if at all, extends to accepting that a differing opinion could exist. Not that we are going to accept it.
Of course, if we are not sure, then a healthy debate definitely helps clarify things. And sometimes confuse.
My earliest arguments were with my brother, and revolved around relative merits in the batsmanship of Gavaskar and Vishwanath. I argued for the latter, my brother supported the former. To this day, I don't think we have settled the debate.
Recent arguments have had a philosophical undertone -- a sign of advancing age, I suppose :) -- and have centred around issues like the purpose of life and the existence of a higher force governing life. After many arguments and debates, online and off, I must admit, my position remains unaltered.
When arguments end amicably, it's usually with a "let's agree to disagree". Other times, they end in acrimonious *&%$#@!!!.
So is there a point to it?
Do I see the beginnings of an argument here? :)
A lot of arguments are intellectual vapourware. Chewing gum for the mind.
I have had many arguments over the years -- with friends, family, colleagues... acrimonious ones, reasonable debates, friendly banter -- and rare have been the occasions when I have been convinced of the other person's viewpoint, and rarer still occasions where I have managed to convince the other person of my viewpoint.
I doubt whether opinions change simply in the face of a forceful argument. Opinions change if they are based in ignorance, and facts bear them out to be wrong. Opinions change if our own experiences go to the contrary. Opinions change if events influence them.
If you have very strong opinions on issues, unless any of the three factors above change them, it's unlikely that any amount of arguing is going to make a difference.
Oh sure, we all have an open mind. Our open mind, if at all, extends to accepting that a differing opinion could exist. Not that we are going to accept it.
Of course, if we are not sure, then a healthy debate definitely helps clarify things. And sometimes confuse.
My earliest arguments were with my brother, and revolved around relative merits in the batsmanship of Gavaskar and Vishwanath. I argued for the latter, my brother supported the former. To this day, I don't think we have settled the debate.
Recent arguments have had a philosophical undertone -- a sign of advancing age, I suppose :) -- and have centred around issues like the purpose of life and the existence of a higher force governing life. After many arguments and debates, online and off, I must admit, my position remains unaltered.
When arguments end amicably, it's usually with a "let's agree to disagree". Other times, they end in acrimonious *&%$#@!!!.
So is there a point to it?
Do I see the beginnings of an argument here? :)
# posted by Ashok @ 10:06 PM 
