>From last week: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <reavisma...@...> wrote: > > A concession is not the same as a contention, > which I believe you understand quite well, or > else you would not have segued at the end of > your post from arguing that I made a contention > to that I had made a concession to Vaj.
As I believe you understand quite well, both terms fit in the contexts in which I used them. To contend something is simply to maintain, state, or affirm it. You contended that Vaj might be correct (and continue to do so below, at some length). That contention, in context, was a concession, as a prelude to your argument that he might be wrong. That it was a concession doesn't somehow mean it wasn't a contention. The "segue" was simply a matter of different contexts, from the more general to the more specific. The latter didn't invalidate or retreat from the former. Don't try to teach your grandmother how to suck eggs, Marek, especially not in an attempt to wiggle out of a false statement. > And my "concession" to Vaj was an acknowledgement > that I don't *know* the truth of the matter > discussed Which was why I said don't let your mind be so open that your brains fall out. Vaj's position is absurd on its face, and you needed to make no concession to the possibility of its being correct--not even for the sake of politeness. > I'm willing to discuss a subject and argue > my position, to the degree I have one, but I > can't tell you that it is Truth just because > I have formed the opinion that it's true. Nobody's talking about capital-T Truth. You sound like Barry. <snip> > Moreover, I have no animus for Vaj and within > the context of my discussion with him, as with > most people, I prefer to be polite and > considerate. He stated his views regarding a > subject where I hold a differing view; I don't > have to be an asshole to disagree with him; > that's simple manners. You don't have to say he could be right when you're quite sure he isn't. That isn't just open-mindedness, that's insincerity, if not cowardice. Good manners call for insincerity in limited situations; debate isn't one of them. "I beg to differ with you" or "We'll have to agree to disagree" is as polite as you need to get.
