whisperingplant

I have enjoyed this post. In this case you would say thanks, I appreciate it.

I dont believe you read my initial post correctly. Argument is a form of conversation that should be avoided. You seem to have confused it with argument as a form of determining whatever it is you want , like whether a does a equal b. You are so busy pushing and prodding any argument that you are missing the conversation. You continually misinterpret and misdirect which indicates tactical use of bewildering the reader as to what is occurring. It becomes quite difficult for a person to maintain a complete understanding of all these posts( separate conversations ) but if you want to micro read into it understand I am not socrates or his equivalent. You are most welcome to avoid this topic and start your own and I may read that and contribute. The topic here is a question not a statement. I personally rate other conversational devices such as wit, statement of fact, quoting much more worthwhile than argument. When you talk at me the way you do I am not interested at all in you and you display to everyone else what they may expect.

good to see somebody comment well. I understand I will always say something arguable. The point is you have a choice of how to reply. We have throughout the years been taught excessively in my opinion to argue well. Your alternatives may be ignoring all the arguable stuff and determine for yourself what you personally believe I might be interested in learning as you have above. You may decide that what I have said may remind you of a witty story that you might want to share that has philosophical ideas and my reading them will increase my understanding. You may read something recently that I have not and refer me to that for my interest. I personally believe people can increase the priority of the alternative responses and decrease direct argument. I have looked up your word axiomata for instance and interestingly found it is the plural of axiom. Some dictionaries do show the plural to be also axioms. very cool instead of me responding in a I can argue for or against it. I would choose to talk about who said it, what it meant and what does the idea lead to. Its a great quote. It is challenging to talk without arguing when all ones life has been spent communicating via argument with so many people who are transitory and fleeting who use arguing techniques. A tactical technique can simply be arguing by the use of frustration. By which I mean pin the discussion to an odd idea or misused word. I would like to say that 'I' uses the mind as a craftsman uses a tool. 'I' will use my mind to achieve my goals.

My hope was to write and contribute something that would have been enjoyable and engaging. I understand my intellectual rigour has been found lacking.

A bit harsh. Yes, I accept your point.

Hi everyone. I don't know just how to reply to specific posts yet. So here is a few answers to the people who were nice for replying. Everyones knowledge compared to each other is at different levels so if 1 + 1 = 2 you might reply 1 + the answer 2 equals 3 a prime number. A constraint that is very difficult to operate within. If we take any endeavour and determine the reward is to communicate with another human being then we can clearly see the following. Newton places his ideas in his principia mathmatica to communicate with anybody willing to listen and learn. Newtons conversation travels some three hundred years into the future to find Einstein. Einstein can't argue with newton because newton is dead. Einstein learns all he can from newton. One thing Einstein learns is he can take the principia mathmatica change it, add to it and change its perspective. But Einstein cannot argue with newton. There is no point. Everybody moves on. A philosophical doctrine where its devotees deliberately refuse to argue anything as a response to another persons communication whatever it be, seems to lead to a better relationship with other people. So now somebody maybe able to see what I don't know contribute something, and I grow.

Thank you for your reply captain panic. the attempt to persuade somebody of something actually hinders the conversational learning approach that we all should take as a philosophical approach to converse with fellow human beings. It is an incredibly hard task to say anything at all that at some level is not arguable. So philosophy discussions suffer from conversations opening like what is consciousness instead of we know consciousness to be. People of different intellectual levels can show more when the latter instead of the former is used. I enjoy reading people who want say I know this because it is not arguable. But what hope is there if the only enjoyment to be gained a conversation is arguing over the meaning of argument.

Hello everyone. I wish everyone well. This is my first posting in a forum. I am of the view that argument is a form of conversation that should be avoided all of the time. This means if I want to say something I am to say it in a manner that is not arguable. If I cannot achieve this I am not entitled to say it. It is important to understand that if I make a statement that is arguable then the person receiving the statement will in all likelihood respond by argument. For example, if we are trying workout is something is concious or not it is important that before stating the word concious its definition be clear and understood or I cannot use the term. I know I am concious, but it becomes pointless conversation to ponder if a dog is concious because the assumption is immediately arguable. The progression of an intelligible and knowledgeable conversation stops and argument starts. Might as well stop talking. So as a community seeking to converse with one another agreement must be sought, developed and understood. It is not a case of I can speak so I shall whether you agree or not. It is a case of I shall continue to increase my knowledge in a disciplined manner in which agreement with people I wish to converse will readily give that agreement. Every idea has its counter idea. Argument to me merely passes the time in a manner that is midly interesting but disciplined expression of non arguable knowledge is more challenging and progressive