Polemics: The Never Ending Debate

(I also accidentally posted this as a response to the previous blog. I'm a bit challenged when it comes to the Internet)

This article clarified the way to approach arguments but unfortunately failed to extract the essential reasons/topics that are most widely debated today. It is easy to lay down "ground rules." I could do the same for the way we need to wash ourselves in the shower, but not everyone will wash himself or herself the same way. Likewise, Lazere's somewhat simplified way of battling over issues doesn't account for numerous other ways of conveying a particular point. This is not to say I agree or disagree with this article but, in most cases, it is nearly impossible to sensitively incorporate everyone's ideas into one set of rules. Nevertheless, I believe Lazere's "rules" could work (I like to keep an open mind), however once a topic is opened up, say for instance the morally delicate topics like religion and sex, there is no clear cut way to convince someone on how to considerately debate.

Although I am, in some way, hypocritical in that I am not offering a specific approach to remedy this problem, I would just like to point out why ground rules aren't the ultimate cure. First, when dealing with moral issues, or even some financial and social issues, people become more passionate and less sensitive to the opposition. Second, people turn to their faith (or beliefs) which limits the opposition from convincing them, and limits them from keeping an open mind. Lastly, people will take ideas the wrong way. Perception, then, becomes reality; there is nothing that you can, or cannot, say that the opposition won't find a way to point out that you are being politically incorrect or simply insensitive or ignorant.