|
haha that's a nifty excuse for social recluses... but discussions were never a means towards finding a perfect answer. The socratic dialectic is "an exchange of propositions (theses) and counter-propositions (antitheses) resulting in a synthesis of the opposing assertions, or at least a qualitative transformation in the direction of the dialogue" (wikipedia). It is because we understand the impossibility of perfect sympathy towards others' points of view (due to the same brain thinking about brain argument), that debates and discussions must necessarily exist to arrive at a more coherent and socially accepted perception.
Of course then, anyone could argue that they were not really social animals (reducing the case to an excuse for social recluses), and are totally driven towards debates by the need to impose their views upon others. In which case they'd have to convince first why the heck their views are better than others', but that they'd never be able to achieve cos that requires disengaged consideration from others. Either way then, it's a lost cause and they'd probably be better off sitting at home telling their ideas to virtuagirl 2000. or something.
|