Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

Adambomb's Journal: With us or against us. 5

Journal by Adambomb

Why are people insistent that anything debatable can only have two possible "Sides".

Proposition:
There is always going to be a large portion of situations, opinions, or interpretations that do not have a binary set of possible results. More often there is an finite yet very large multidimensional set of possible conclusions or positions involved in any debate.

Given that, why must so many people feel the need to constantly defend their own interpretation without possibility of revision or allow for the introduction of new data?

As the good old monty python crew once mentioned "You are all different! You are all individuals! Don't let anyone tell you what to do!"

Sadly, the unison that follows is no longer as funny as it used to be.

Think for yourselves.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

With us or against us.

Comments Filter:
  • Aside from debating yourself, the minimum number of combatants required for any external conflict is 2. I put it that way because to fight, or wage war is to abandon reason IMO -- and two sided coin arguments (false dichotomies, black and white thinking, etc) are efforts to undermine one's opponent, rather than further one's own view. Two sided coin arguments map neatly on to our typical zero sum Player vs. Player perception of human conflict, at most levels.

    Note how often people fall in to the pattern of

    • by Adambomb (118938)
      Well thats the why, rationally. Good way of putting it.

      Guess I more wanted to rant about how people determine your position then base everything they say on the category they associate with that position and refuse to listen to a single thing you say once they have you categorized in their heads.
  • As you were. [scienceblogs.com]
    • by Adambomb (118938)
      This has nothing to do with indecisiveness or apathy. This has to do with the fact that people will insist on reducing an argument to conclusions A or B, without regard to possible C's, D's, E's, or F solutions or viewpoints.

      Meaning more in terms of the Ents (without the time it takes to make the decision) "I am not sure if I am on your side, as no one seems to be entirely on ours" or whatever the original quote actually is (similar gist if nothing else).
    • by Adambomb (118938)
      Actually, just read the other fellows comment, he puts it pretty much perfectly. I just couldn't find the words to describe it.

"If there isn't a population problem, why is the government putting cancer in the cigarettes?" -- the elder Steptoe, c. 1970

Working...