Re: Are we defeated by the very topics we feel passionate about? ( was Re: NO NO NO NO etc)

From: Anders Sandberg (asa@nada.kth.se)
Date: Fri Jan 17 2003 - 09:56:29 MST


One prerequisite for having a constructive discussion about a powerful
topic is to be able to handle it on a high level of abstraction. When you
know enough about a topic you can start to look at it from different
sides. You can be abstract enough about it so that you become
dispassionate.

Unfortunately people tend to debate many issues they *feel* strongly
about, but do not *know* much about. Witness the Lomborg debate, for
example. On this list the problem is that people seem to think that it is
better to debate now and learn later, rather than the reverse. For a
really thoughful and constructive debate, first study the issue throughly
Just reading debunkings of your opponent's arguments isn't really study;
real study means that you learn how the field fits within the web of
human existence and how it works, what the different positions are, the
supporting evidence and methods and so on. Google is excellent for
getting instant arguments for and against some issue, entire essays
proving whatever you want to prove. But can you judge how good these
essays are? That takes more than just a bit of critical reading, that
takes understanding the subject.

I think the problem here on the list is not that human nature is against
us, but simply that it is a loud cocktail party where everybody is
talking rather than the thoughtful scholarly den where many of us really
would like to be.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anders Sandberg                                      Towards Ascension!
asa@nada.kth.se                            http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/
GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 17:10:21 MST