tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23964814.post5514996674119448449..comments2024-03-07T16:08:49.323+00:00Comments on London, Lanka and drums: Agreement Is ExcitingRhythmic Diasporahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15184142486414379805noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23964814.post-78555054175320465262011-07-22T16:37:50.475+01:002011-07-22T16:37:50.475+01:00Indi - I agree, but again I believe a fight is a v...Indi - I agree, but again I believe a fight is a very effective way of merely winning a fight.<br /><br />Anon - I'm, as you probably know, a big fan of the 6 hats, but I do think that it's a way of mapping out and making a group do what most of us actually do in our head before we come to a decision on what view to take/preach. <br /><br />The biggest issue with this "conventional" thinking, IMHO, is that it is almost entirely individual. We take other people's opinions and facts, to differing levels, into account but do the decision making process in our head. As a consequence we argue with less intelligent people who have done the same thing in their heads, but who haven't always considered things intelligently or in the way other people would have. The result is the "I am right, you are wrong" arguments we all know and love. <br /><br />Your last sentence sums things up, wise words Anon, wise words indeed.Rhythmic Diasporahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15184142486414379805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23964814.post-86173231190569467602011-07-22T16:16:04.024+01:002011-07-22T16:16:04.024+01:00Though I love the six thinking hats I feel that so...Though I love the six thinking hats I feel that sometimes there are few options but fighting for what you believe. <br /><br />First of course there is talking, then talking louder, then yelling. Hopefully not followed by vase throwing and punching. <br /> <br />We argue because we passionately believe something to be right, to prove the other person wrong, and to change them in some way to our way of thinking. If you take the need to change out of the equation then maybe the arguments would be thrown out too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23964814.post-90192393610046402242011-07-22T09:05:40.034+01:002011-07-22T09:05:40.034+01:00Blogfight!
It's just fun to say. Blogfights a...Blogfight!<br /><br />It's just fun to say. Blogfights are always good for traffic, if not the brain. Respectful debate I think is always OK.<br /><br />But yeah, positive posts generally get less traffic, like positive news. I think we still have to keep them coming.indihttp://indi@indi.canoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23964814.post-79436053131229294322011-07-22T08:23:30.692+01:002011-07-22T08:23:30.692+01:00JP - I agree with you and Mr Socrates. And I also ...JP - I agree with you and Mr Socrates. And I also feel that debate and argument are possibly one )or two) of the least effective methods of discovering the truth. That of course assumes, that there is a "truth" to be discovered, when often there isn't a definitive one out there. <br /><br />It would appear that many people did learn from reading different peoples' views on the blogs you mentioned. I just reckon there are ways in which we could have done the same thing more quickly, more effectively and more amicably.<br /><br />Thanks for the comment as ever. I find the subject of thinking to be a fascinating and interesting one. <br /><br />RDRhythmic Diasporahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15184142486414379805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23964814.post-86621386845583841222011-07-22T05:35:04.428+01:002011-07-22T05:35:04.428+01:00And now I've gone and written another politica...And now I've gone and written another political piece, something that stemmed from a comment on your blog..Jack Pointhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00324737814154929009noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23964814.post-80265058013498302212011-07-22T05:33:16.487+01:002011-07-22T05:33:16.487+01:00It is through debate and argument that we may disc...It is through debate and argument that we may discover the truth.<br /><br />This idea was advocated by Socrates.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method<br /><br />However, to be productive the argument needs to follow certain principles.<br /><br />Aristotle developed the discipline of logic, proper arguments that conform to certain principles will always be productive.<br /><br />A summary of the basic flaws in arguments, the polarisation that you speak of tends to flow from this, is below:<br /><br />http://atheism.about.com/od/logicalflawsinreasoning/Logical_Flaws_in_Reasoning_Flawed_Reasoning_Arguments_and_Attitudes.htm<br /><br />By and large the Indi's post and your response gave rise to a great deal of productive debate. I learned something from it, so I gather did Indi, Electra and yourself.<br /><br />I had a dismal academic record in school, but one subject I learned passably well was logic, it was the only subject I passed in my A' Levels.<br /><br />I might add that it was the single most useful thing I learned in all my wasted years in school.<br /><br />Logic needs to be taught, compulsorily from grade 7 or 8.<br /><br />I want to find an introduction to Logic to just go and sharpen my thinking a bit, its getting rather woolly.Jack Pointhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00324737814154929009noreply@blogger.com