Is logical consistency not a core tenant of a rational argument? I’ll concede th...

ddingus · on June 7, 2019

It absolutely is.

However, people are often not entirely rational creatures.

Advocacy, for a very effective example, is a combination of reason, emotion and character.

How people feel matters. Who they are interacting with and or referencing matters.

Roll all that up, and we are likely to encounter people who are not self consistent.

That is OK, human. I just noted that being a predetermination, that's all.

Secondly, there is no requirement they be more rational in their arguments. They may not even see something as one, depending on what it is.

They may, for example, seek better mutual understanding.

perl4ever · on June 7, 2019

I readily affirm that feelings are most important, but it's pretty common to refuse to abandon one's feelings or one's facts and logic in the name of consistency.

It's not that someone can expect you to feel differently because they've presented a logical argument. That's not likely or expected.

ddingus · on June 8, 2019

Does any of that matter?

The OP said they did not predetermine, and I just pointed out that they do. (And I do not care)

No worries, just information.

Understanding others helps considerably when having conversations IMHO. My comments here speak to that.

Just know others may, or may not make the value judgements presented in this thread, that's all.

It is far more likely than you think. Consider a politically charged issue, some matter where religion is involved...

This all just is not the set piece implied.