Quote:
Originally posted by John D Harris:
quote:
Originally posted by Davros:
quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
Thank you and good night gracie!
|
When someone holds an opinion this strongly, any attempt to debate them is pointless. Even if I cared enough to make any points in opposition, it is apparent that I would be dealing with a mind that has made its decision and is totally closed to other viewpoints. My advice to people is to simply avoid the argument (note the deliberate lack of use of the word "debate").
Don't say I didn't warn you people 
[/QUOTE]Davros, It been my experience in life the most close minded are the ones that complain about others being close minded. In a like manner the most arguementative are the ones that say to another "all you want to do is argue" while ignoring their own argueing. It takes at least two to disagree, how they handle the disagreement determinds weither or not the disagreement is an arguement.[/QUOTE][img]smile.gif[/img]
Interesting points you raise JD, and I'll debate them with you if I may as I have always known you to listen and think on both sides of the discussion.
A prime tenet of my proposal is that a clear correlation has been established, whereby it is the custom of one party to steadfastly take unalterable positions on numerous discussion topics.
For confirmatory evidence I cite the following "because some times I do just stir the pot (yes I can admit it)". Before I get accused of quoting out of context, I am at pains to point out that whilst the above quote has been cut from a larger statement, the communicative purpose has not been altered, and it nevertheless openly confirms something of which many of us were aware. Our combative interlocutor, in the most basic on venacular, "enjoys a good stoush".
I quite admire the first point you make - I'll even go so far as to wholeheartedly endorse it [img]smile.gif[/img] . The most close minded are the ones that complain about others being close minded. Of course, if I were to go back over the many and varied posts by our good friend on such topics as atheism, public health care, and (gasp) gun control - I am confident that you would often come across words like "your missing my point", "you have no idea what you are talking about", "you don't understand", "you're still not listening to me", ....... really, need I go on?
Don't take my word for it though - set yourself the task of looking through those threads and seeing how often that theme comes through. Of course the big M wasn't the only one saying those sort of things - they come when either side fails to see the others' point - look for a consistent correlation though, and judge for yourself.
Onwards then to your last statement - "It takes at least two to disagree, how they handle the disagreement determinds weither or not the disagreement is an arguement." First of all an apology [img]smile.gif[/img] for including your spelling mistakes in my quoting - I am however hoping to enrol in Father Bronze's Grammarian Brigade. I ask you this - how often have you known our good friend to be prepared to disagree? How many times have you seen him say "well I think we will have to agree to disagree on that". The mantra that he seems to live by is "my way or the highway".
You may not see things from my perspective JD, and if you don't, then we will have to agree to disagree.
Looking forward to your rebuttal though, and an open exchange of viewpoints on the topic [img]smile.gif[/img]