-I'm a confirmed liberal, just to put the discussion in some context,
and the folks I was talking to are conservatives-
A friend posted a link on FB with this headline: "New leaked email shows Paul Ryan collects Clinton Cash days ahead of WI Primary". I clicked through, read the article, and responded by saying that the actual article didn't make that claim but only said Ryan "may be" accepting "Clinton Cash". I asked if there was any evidence at all that he actually had. These were the responses I got:
- Usually, where there is smoke, there is fire!
- Well if it walks like a duck quakes like a duck and swims like a duck. Guess what ???
- Open your ears!
Now whether you are a liberal or a conservative, surely we can all agree that these are not sensible reasons for believing a claim. That #ManyPeopleAreSaying a thing doesn't make the thing true. Facts and evidence are important. So, I think, is the ability to participate in a reasoned discussion explaining your own beliefs and the reasons for them and pointing out reasons you don't believe the other person's.
I've found this wonderful 6-session course on critical reasoning. I wonder if it would be of use.
Anyway....
This free course on Critical Reasoning for Beginners is offered by Oxford University. This is the description of the course:
Are you confident you can reason clearly? Are you able to convince others of your point of view? Are you able to give plausible reasons for believing what you believe? Do you sometimes read arguments in the newspapers, hear them on the television, or in the pub and wish you knew how to confidently evaluate them?The first video lesson is The Nature of Arguments and can be viewed at their site or here:
In this six-part course, you will learn all about arguments, how to identify them, how to evaluate them, and how not to mistake bad arguments for good. Such skills are invaluable if you are concerned about the truth of your beliefs, and the cogency of your arguments.
All this emotional reaction to the current presidential candidates seems to miss the point to me. I would think a bit more logic, a few more facts, and a little less vitriolic attack might aid our understanding of the issues.
Posts
I agree that circular reasoning seems to be the point here, BUT it isn't really offensive. I've received messages that tell me I PERSONALLY must be a hate monger because I do NOT believe all Muslims should be thrown out of our country and to pray to god that someone with genuine reason will be elected President. Now THESE are the ones I really want to respond to, but have found it's easier to keep my mouth shut and let others judge the initiator rather than the responder.
ReplyDeleteBut this isn't circular reasoning; it's not "reasoning" of any kind. What this is is emotional reaction. I just wish people would 1) fact-check their own information; 2) Listen to other people's views and respond with something other than "open your ears and you'll hear THE TRUTH!"; 3) not get soooo angry. We ought to be able to discuss these things without yelling at and insulting people :(
DeleteFor many thinking goes out the window when an argument starts and arguments escalate pretty fast when one side sees the U.S. and pictures a triangle and the other side sees a circle.
ReplyDeleteYes, it's hard to agree on even the basic premises :( I just get tired of people responding to my reasoned arguments and fact-checking by saying they're too busy to do any fact-checking and they trust their sources to always be right. You can't have a discussion that way :(
DeleteThat's the sad part. People are not using reasoning and are guided by knee jerk emotional reactions (mostly fear, anger and frustration). When people are wound up the majority usually can't think straight--so keep them wound up and you can lead them by the nose. Politicians know this and use it to their advantage. Crowd or mob mentality scares the hell out of me. I wish people could be aware of that and be able to take a step back and use logic and reasoning. But they are beyond listening to anything they don't want to hear. That is why I try not to discuss politics (or religion) on my blog and normally never comment online, either, but I do agree with you. :)
ReplyDeleteMy practice, and I would encourage you to consider it, is to respond to insult and yelling with calm responses and questions. I aid my own understanding when I can get folks to engage me, even if they're just emotionally reacting to something they've read online. Sometimes I can get folks to answer questions that at least get them into an actual conversation. I'm unwilling to give it up :( but I do understand your reluctance.
DeleteInteresting, I'll have to delve into the course to see what I find. I'm fairly good at checking out facts and making my own decisions in what I hope is a calm reasoned manner. However, I'm usually not so good at trying to discuss them with anyone. For the most part it just tires me out. I know, that's lazy thinking for sure.
ReplyDeleteThat's not lazy thinking at all :) Some people just like discussing controversial topics. I enjoy it and find it helps me understand my own view and that of others better. It does help when people stay calm and don't start screaming insults at each other. The moral equivalent of "Is not!" "Is, too!" isn't helpful ;)
DeleteInteresting, I'll have to delve into the course to see what I find. I'm fairly good at checking out facts and making my own decisions in what I hope is a calm reasoned manner. However, I'm usually not so good at trying to discuss them with anyone. For the most part it just tires me out. I know, that's lazy thinking for sure.
ReplyDelete