Some people that I have worked with are simply argumentative. But a select handful of very smart people argue in a specific fashion that actually works to ImproveTheDialectic
. In other words, their form of discussion gets other people to thinking in greater depth about how they are approaching a certain problem, and at the same time their form of discussion leads to other discussions.
I think the trick to this is to argue from a neutral, investigative mindset, with the genuine intention of opening up all dialogues to ExploreTheBoundaries?
of all possibilities. The person working to ImproveTheDialectic
can raise serious concerns without sounding as though they are being critical, without trying to be "right" or make other people "wrong".
Asking questions instead of giving answers is one of the techniques in HowToWinFriendsAndInfluencePeople
Not right, not wrong, just fitting
There are occasions when a NeutralPointOfView
apply, and there are certainly occasions when they do not. (This is an attempt to ImproveTheDialectic
To assert than criticism without trying to be right or wrong, and to introduce all possibilities into the discussion is to introduce the possibility that a consensus, or a focus on solutions to problems will never occur. This being said, it is also true that limiting a solution to the simple choice between two alternatives, may result in a less than optimum decision. The focus should be on the "appropriateness" and "viability" of suggested solutions. Some may assert that this is assigning a "rightness" when what has occurred is the application of "fitness". -- DonaldNoyes
The primary reason why the InternetIsSoPopular?
is because it has done so much to ImproveTheDialectic
. It achieves this by allowing variances in the normal concept of a "conversation" -- for example, on the Internet you can:
- add to a conversation anonymously
- particpate in a threaded conversation over a long, discontinuous period of time
- easily invite or exclude people from your view of a conversation
- incoporate graphic, audio, streaming, or other non-textual elements into a conversation
Of course the nature of the conversation varies by context -- the kind of conversation that we have on WikiWiki
is different than that on UseNet
, or MySpace
But it also allows shouters and zealots to muck up the environment with forceful tactics. The real world has bouncers, the internet not so much. The trick may be to find a happy medium.