This page was last updated on February 24, 2018.
We don’t understand how to argue civilly; L. Benjamin Diaz (LBD); Beaver County Times; February 16, 2018.
An editor’s note says, “The writer is an 11th-grader at Lincoln Park Performing Arts Charter school.”
Below is a review of the subject letter.
“I am concerned that as Americans we can no longer talk to one another about controversial topics.
“For example, the editorial cartoon in The Times on Feb. 4 showed a first section noting that we live in a ‘polarized climate in this country.’ In the second section, two men are shouting at each other about who’s going to win the Super Bowl.”
[RWC] “Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.” – attributed to Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens).
“The point is, when we have differing opinions, why can’t we discuss topics civilly?”
[RWC] First, many of us don’t do the required self-education needed to debate an issue. You can’t properly argue a point if you don’t know the facts.
Second, many of us refuse delivery of the facts of an issue if those facts don’t support our pre-determined position.
Third, the ideological and political goals of too many of us are not served well with widespread knowledge of the facts.
Fourth, too many of us lie. By lie, I mean lie, not unintentionally getting a fact wrong. These folks tend to believe the ends justify the means. For example, the secretary of a local leftist group once wrote, “Perhaps provoking them [election officials] with stretched truths is an apporpriate [sic] tactic. But let’s see it for what it is … a tactic.” Translation: It’s OK to lie to affect government policy.
The combination of these points is what turns debates into exercises of flame-throwing, name-calling, and so on.
“My answer is a lack of the study of what has become old-fashioned today: the art of rhetoric. It is the ‘art of speaking or writing effectively, such as the rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times.’ Today, the word ‘argument’ only carries a very negative connotation. This was not so in ancient Rome. For those residents, arguing or discussing a controversial topic followed rules and those participating in the debate knew the guidelines.
“Why don’t we know these rules today? It’s because we do not study the art of rhetoric in our schools. We have generations of Americans who have no idea what rhetoric is, much less what its rules are. This can only be changed by addressing the issue at the educational level and teaching it to students as a part of the curriculum, not as an elective.”
[RWC] Ah, to be an eleventh-grader again. The problem has to do with education, but it’s not a lack of debate education.
“Unfortunately, the existing curriculum leaves little time for the ancient art of rhetoric. Thus we continue to shout at one another when we disagree, and we pass this barbaric practice on to the next generation.”
[RWC] Shortly after I began debating lefties online and critiquing their editorials, letters, and so on, I was surprised by the poor quality of local/national lefty debaters, even those who have been activists for decades. It appears they spend so much of their time “preaching to the choir” they are in over their heads when it comes to debating a knowledgeable conservative. They also spend their time using gibberish to convince themselves how smart they all are. One local/national activist tried to run me off while a “sweetness & light” taxpayer-subsidized daycare operator told me I didn’t care about dying babies. My sin? I disagreed with her positions regarding Hurricane Katrina issues and explained my positions using facts, history, and logic.
© 2004-2018 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.