RE: [TruthTalk] On occupying antithetical positions

Thu, 03 Feb 2005 08:53:36 -0800

It's true that it looks like there is little headway. Nobody moves from thesis to antithesis. People do shift, though, and may inch their way even towards antithesis. Part of this movement is unconscious and related to the fact that personal encounters inevitably leave the persons permanently marked. In my observation the phenomenon goes something like this: B tries to persuade A of a very different view. A resists fiercely throughout, using Scripture, logical argument, and the authority of earlier saints, and goes away quite satisfied that she has refuted B. Later, A meets C of like mind, who trashes the position of B in a similar way. A responds, "You don't know what you're talking about. B's view is actually not so bad. Parts of it can be understood in the following way," and begins to defend a version of view B. A is not even surprised that she is doing so. She doesn't yet subscribe to view B, but IF this happens often enough, it's entirely possible she will. As long as B doesn't meet A again, he will believe no headway was made. Meanwhile B's own view has probably moderated somewhat.
 
None of this depends on how nice any of the people have been. It does have to do with whether they've made any sense or not and whether they've had some point of commonality to start with. I'm not sure what all is at play, and the time lines are different in every case. There may be an element of gratification for A that she understands more about B than C does. And there is surely an element of face-saving that slows A's movement. Nobody is completely honest (with herself or with others) even while fully intending to be.
 
Note the point about personal encounters. That's where participants are actually "present" in the encounter, alive to it, engaged. This happens. But lots of people never really relate as persons.
 
As to ventriloquism: there are some people on this listserv under whose name, with a little effort, I could probably write. Others delight and bewilder me by continually stretching the mental shape I have for them. But then, I'm not that literate either.
 
Debbie
-----Original Message-----
From: Lance Muir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:32 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] On occupying antithetical positions

Of course. When you review the ongoing 'conversations' within the  cliques/camps on TT what headway do you see being made? The more literate among us (that'd exclude me) could occupy both sides of any conversation while 'speaking' (writing) under the name of virtually any person.
Is this not so? 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: February 03, 2005 09:20
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] On occupying antithetical positions

In a message dated 2/3/2005 5:17:39 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Kevin says: 'They will not change by skilled reasoning.' Please describe the nature of the content of your own posts, Kevin. Are we witnessing the wisdom of God or, the wisdom of Kevin? If a Mormon I, I'd be quite unmoved. On the whole they (your arguments) are quite supercillious.


I do beleive that a worthy point of discussion would be one which includes an understanding of just why it is that honest people disagree on most any issue.

J

Reply via email to