Should the purpose of argument ultimately be to reach an agreement? | Page 5 | INFJ Forum

Should the purpose of argument ultimately be to reach an agreement?

Discussion in 'Philosophy and Religion' started by Gaze, Dec 5, 2014.

Share This Page

Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 3 users.
More threads by Gaze
  1. sprinkles

    sprinkles Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Threads:
    70
    Messages:
    9,483
    Likes Received:
    6,765
    Trophy Points:
    1,011
    MBTI:
    xxxx
    I can see making a presentation to clarify, or maybe very small arguments but once again the idea is to elucidate, not merely get the other party to agree.

    The best solution should go forward and if there's too many arbitrary arguments, then something is wrong and you need new colleagues. We often have a large pool of past experience to rely on when it comes to problem solving and rarely are objections raised arbitrarily when something really matters. If there happens to be a disagreement there better be a really good reason for it.
     
  2. sprinkles

    sprinkles Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Threads:
    70
    Messages:
    9,483
    Likes Received:
    6,765
    Trophy Points:
    1,011
    MBTI:
    xxxx
    Nothing is EVER you, is it. Not ever.
     
    rawr likes this.
  3. sprinkles

    sprinkles Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Threads:
    70
    Messages:
    9,483
    Likes Received:
    6,765
    Trophy Points:
    1,011
    MBTI:
    xxxx
    [MENTION=1669]pics[/MENTION]

    Also I would add that in some fields there's room for innovation and more creative problem solving on the side. Like in programming there can often be a development branch and a stable branch of software. Development branch is where they try new things and it's a separate branch because it's not well tested - new ways of doing things can be unreliable and even dangerous. In the stable branch things are much more nailed down - you know what works, you know why it works, and it works reliably.

    Similarly with disasters, flood control etc. it is better to go with what is already established and save any objections for research.
     
  4. muir

    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    11,092
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    I post the information how you react is upto to you (everyone else is posting their info or opinion too)

    If you're interested you can read it if you're not interested you can ignore it

    if you think the information is correct you could give me a thumbs up and maybe post some corroborating info; if you think it's incorrect then you could post some information that proves it so; if you're right then it can help me and if you're wrong then it can help you

    But if you just want to bend my ear because your feathers are ruffled then to be honest i'm not really interested in hearing from you, but that's just my angle because i am trying to understand the world better....that's where i'm coming from. other people clearly have other agendas
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  5. sprinkles

    sprinkles Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Threads:
    70
    Messages:
    9,483
    Likes Received:
    6,765
    Trophy Points:
    1,011
    MBTI:
    xxxx
    Yeah just fuck all the good times we had. Fuck all the jokes and quips, goofing off and my apologizing for being mad at you.

    Just fuck the fact that I almost could have said we were friends. Just let me get all close to you and stuff then suddenly I can't confide something personal because all you're about is truth and just fuck me right? Like there was never a little connection or camaraderie and I'm suddenly a complete stranger. Yeah I see how you are.

    That hurts after all we've been through since I first started talking to you.
     
  6. Pahndi

    Pahndi Community Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2014
    Threads:
    3
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    577
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    2w1
    Should the purpose of argument ultimately be to reach an agreement? Why or why not?

    furiously sleep ideas green colors

    we all agree the above makes no sense. no one will argue that, no purpose. arguments occur when someone says "aha! it makes sense to me". people become confused since subconsciously we all know the ultimate truth without saying it.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  7. muir

    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    11,092
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    We're all going to have to choose sides soon
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  8. sprinkles

    sprinkles Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Threads:
    70
    Messages:
    9,483
    Likes Received:
    6,765
    Trophy Points:
    1,011
    MBTI:
    xxxx
    I'm on my side as usual.
     
  9. muir

    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    11,092
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    good luck with that
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  10. Lark

    Lark Rothchildian Agent

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Threads:
    255
    Messages:
    2,220
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    245
    MBTI:
    ENTJ
    Enneagram:
    9
    The other points I wanted to make were that agreement isnt necessarily an outcome, I think there is lot of grounds for managed conflict, I actually think its much more realistic a goal than elmination of conflict or conflict resolution.

    If you want to use the analogy of a marriage there are marriages in which there are frequent arguments, even pretty public arguments and the marriage endures, then there are other marriages in which there are simmering grievances and differences always beneath the surface and the same public argument would be enough to provoke crisis and the ending of the relationship altogether.

    There has been some good work done upon the conflict in Northern Ireland in contrast to other conflicts globally, such as the outbreak of ethnic war in the former Yugoslavia, the one involving a lot of terror and blood shed but never escalating, yet, to complete and utter genocidal civil war.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  11. Lark

    Lark Rothchildian Agent

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Threads:
    255
    Messages:
    2,220
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    245
    MBTI:
    ENTJ
    Enneagram:
    9
    I actually dont think there is anything wrong per se with irreconcilable differences, provided that this is recognised by all parties involved, what does prove problematic is when one party believes the irreconcilable difference is a pretext for violence or harm or elimination.

    There are some sorts of thinking and opinions which pose dangers and are regulated and controlled and limited in some way or another, by law or by other means, but I tend to think of those things as being very fundamental taboos such as incest, murder, sex offending. Any one who has managed to get themselves confused on this score and come to believe that its all relative are simply not practicing reductive thinking in the right/appropriate way, ambivalence can arise when you introduce greater and greater complexity into the issue.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  12. muir

    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    11,092
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    What about gay people....what do you think of them? Should they be able to marry?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  13. OP
    Gaze

    Gaze My word . . . hmm
    Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    Threads:
    2,373
    Messages:
    27,932
    Featured Threads:
    91
    Likes Received:
    19,722
    Trophy Points:
    1,906
    MBTI:
    .
    So, you think the purpose or end result of argument is understanding leading to acknowledgement of the truth, not simply reasoning?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  14. Pahndi

    Pahndi Community Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2014
    Threads:
    3
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    577
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    2w1
    Whatever you acknowledge as the truth has to be the same for me. If not, I will argue with you why. This leads to problems.

    If you want to reason with me, I will agree with you for the sake of understanding because we agreed on what reasoning can do!

    Now the ultimate question, are you right? I have no idea, but I rather agree with you because I don't know the answer yet. Science hasn't gotten us there yet.

    Right now reasoning makes universal logical sense, but how do you argue the belief in trust for a better world. It has to be validated by surrendering one's ego for letting all human conscious be on the same page. We are still progressing since the Enlightenment Era.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  15. OP
    Gaze

    Gaze My word . . . hmm
    Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    Threads:
    2,373
    Messages:
    27,932
    Featured Threads:
    91
    Likes Received:
    19,722
    Trophy Points:
    1,906
    MBTI:
    .
    So, in other words, we can't have final argument yet, only reason? So, you believe the truth has not yet been revealed because we are still discovering it? In other words, all we can do is come to an agreement of what each person understands as reasonable?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  16. Pahndi

    Pahndi Community Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2014
    Threads:
    3
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    163
    Trophy Points:
    577
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    2w1
    We could have a final argument, we can theorize. I believe truth is more like a relative experience, a process of evolution. Yes, all we can do is come to an agreement of what each person understands as reasonable.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  17. ryiker

    ryiker Community Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2014
    Threads:
    1
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    125
    MBTI:
    intp?
    I understand and agree with Muir's 'perception as a screen' and unless they have already begun to move social and swallowed logic on their own, an argument with them is not only useless but some of the people I have encountered, find it almost abusive when I don't I don't see their points of view. I agree some are playing a long game, but I prefer to think of it more as a long con, not a con on the opposing argument per say, but a long con on yourself if you have not weighed and examined all of your own perceptions. How can you state that they 'belong' to you if you have never made a serious effort to break them down and counter them?
    With this I have to disagree to a degree (haha). If someone has a point of view or argument etc and they hold it to be right or true according to their knowledge of right/truth then they would have had to examine it wouldn't they? How can someone say they believe or know something to be right/true if they have not examined it themselves, asked questions and (hopefully) challenged it with experience and counter arguments of logic? If someone says they stand for something or believe in it and then they immediately get defensive or upset when asked or arguments arise, it is obvious to me they have no ground for what they are stating. I don't have to prove them wrong, or even discuss and find out if their arguments are in fact correct- the underlying perception for me is that they have no argument to make if they are this upset over someone questioning it. If they are in fact correct then someone, somewhere else will possibly have the same idea or point of view and I will be able to discuss and evaluate all arguments with them. If they are not comfortable doing this then I would be continue to discuss it with them for what reason? Yes I do enjoy discussing and arguing theories, logic etc, however in order to do that I require a capable counter part or at least devils advocate.
    Again I disagree, I enter debates and arguments always to learn more and expand on what others can tell me. I have NO problem changing my argument or position mid sentence if you can give me something new or an angle I have not yet seen. Anyone who gets into an argument simply to prove their right has already lost the debate in my opinion (or maybe never begun it) because there is no give, just continuous self righteous positioning. If that is the intention then the individual is looking for followers and to be justified, not in the expansion that debate potentially creates when all parties are interesting in actual discussion. On the other hand many individuals fall into the of charisma or psychological manipulation that debtors use to win an argument regardless of what the actual discussion is. They hear a discussion or participate and fall for the individual's mannerism instead of the argument. This manipulation is effective and unfortunately (to me) many people base their 'idea' of which side is correct off this. In my ruthless point of view, if this is how you decide debates then you have no part it whatsoever, except as the manipulative statistics of those arguing.
    I agree this types of input piss me off and I have no patience for it. I will walk away mid-sentence or ignore if some is only giving opinions to hear themselves speak. [MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION]They remind me of the attention whores you were going to punish lol
    No I don't think the end result of arguments should be always to agree. Most of the time you learn something new with each debate and people challenge themselves as much as one another. It's a form of communication and is to be enjoyed I think.
     
    #97 ryiker, Dec 8, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2014
Loading...

Share This Page