20th September 2005, 8:02 PM
Perhaps instead of appeal to emotion, arguments stemming entirely from logic would be more productive? Perhaps a basic concept or goal both sides agree on, and from there it's all logic and empirical evidence and nothing else. At least then people have to admit when they are wrong and there's some progress...
*is stared at like a plague scorpion*
Well... I better be hitting the ol' dusty trail...
...
*riiiing*
Whoops, fire door...
*squeezes through some other rows and quietly exits*
*is stared at like a plague scorpion*
Well... I better be hitting the ol' dusty trail...
...
*riiiing*
Whoops, fire door...
*squeezes through some other rows and quietly exits*
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)