Quote:
I don't challenge anyone's beliefs or PoVs in order to be more right, it's always to bring an issue into the light. I also try not to talk out my ass...in other words I'm prepared to defend my position, though I'm also willing to concede to a higher order of understanding. So here's what I'm curious about...are people writing rote views that they don't fully understand or support themselves, so when challenged, they can only pass? Or do they smugly decline to engage at all, so as to always be right? (OK, 3rd choice...fuzzy, peaceful, bliss that needs no defense.)
|
What I see a lot of is people stating "My opinion is X" without elaborating on the justification for that position (myself included). Given that some of the issues are things that are impossible to know for sure (e.g., what exactly is going to happen in 2012?), and people's point of view may be based on a lifetime of experience but a limited number of concrete observations or experiences, it is really difficult to provide justification for one's point of view without typing pages and pages that few people are going to want to read. Even then, one person's evidence may look like complete nonsense to another. You can't
know my experiences the way I do. Something deeply moving may seem like complete jibberish when expressed in English. The knowledge I bring to bear when evaluating evidence may be in subjects you know little about (not directed at any particular "you"). Some information may be just a little too personal. Maybe what I have to say about my experiences will seem too incredible to believe. And so on. So, practicing the law of allowance is not such a bad idea. I put in my two cents worth and move on.
There are times when I think I might try to defend a position, but then I wonder if it is really worth the time and effort to put together a well reasoned argument with supporting links. Will it really change anybody's mind? How much does that matter to me? So rather than argue each time I see a post that I don't agree with, I look for times when I can provide information that I feel is sound that will help make murky issues a little bit less so. I also will state a contrarian opinion when I feel the urge, but rarely see much point in arguing such things at length for the reasons I just stated.
As for the topic of this thread, I haven't really read the nexus threads since some of the early posts. It's just not something I felt the urge to be involved in. Those discussions seem to take place in a few focused threads and do not interfere with the rest of the forum, so I don't see any hijacking taking place.