We need to call out lowbrow thinking and discourse, especially from our own side
One of the most important posts I've seen in a long time anywhere! The ferocity of the so called dialogue in our country over the last several years has been frightening. I remember healthy and respectful debates in high school. We no longer see that played out. Political debates become blood sport. Friends and familial relationships torn. Employment and social freedoms lost for those that thought like actual scientists, all by people claiming they were FOR the science but arguing as the low rung thinkers of the attorney at best, and the zealot at worst. THANK YOU for bringing this timely topic FORWARD this Friday, Bob.
Thank you for another fascinating Friday Forward. The only point I would take issue with (constructively) is that regarding the attorney. Yes, the goal of the attorney is to passionately argue his or her side of the case. Yet the purpose of this, seen in the context of the broader legal system and society, is to (at least ideally) arrive at the truth. Legal reasoning in this sense is more similar to scientific reasoning in that it relies on deductive and inductive reasoning in in order to separate fact from opinion and make valid (truthful) arguments. Cicero and Cato come to mind, both great lawyers, whose arguments are echoed to this day in defense of liberty and truth.
Thanks again. Looking forward to the next newsletter.
A great summary of how people approach disagreement. I am going to be thinking about these four categories in my interactions this week.
So simple yet profound. It seems like a logical process to sift your opinions up and down the ladder to test and arrive at sound thinking.
While it may be difficult to have our ideas challenged, it is also necessary for our growth. Thanks for this one!
Always providing great quotes, Robert. Thank you!
Excellent - thank you :-)