0
1

[–] Johnny_Ninja 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I think I know what you mean. But I fail to see how my preferred argument doesn't prove a logical point?

Maybe I don't know how to convert people's thinking. I'm certainly open to that possibility.

On the other hand, if you're dealing with someone who is the least bit logical, I fail to see how my argument doesn't appeal to the logical side. But hey, I'm all ears.

0
0

[–] Paladin_Diver ago 

As I hope I made clear, your argument is sound and I agree with it. If this were a debate, it would be a winning argument. You'd score points.

Our goals, I would hope, are not to score points. Our goal is to get enough people to start questioning the storyline they've been fed for years that entails binary, right/wrong, us/them, red/blue thinking where Orange Man Bad and that the .gov can solve everything, etc..etc... Our goal, to use a terrible phrase, is to win hearts and minds, not debate points.

In trying to win hearts, and maintain family civility, I'm suggesting that if you walk them down the path to either A) find the truth themselves, or B) question their own sources, they'll let go of the ingrained gaslighting and start thinking for themselves. After that, the facts can be laid out.

It's about the thought process, not the facts.

(I love this conversation and am more than happy to continue, but gotta get some zzzzzzz).

0
0

[–] Johnny_Ninja ago  (edited ago)

I am convinced that there's something I'm missing, mainly the difference between winning an argument VS what you're talking about.

I think you're right, we should be focused on doing what you're talking about VS simply proving someone wrong.

I guess my problem is that I don't understand the nuances of the goals you're talking about achieving, much less how to achieve them. I think I could be a more effective soldier in this war if I understood these things better. Like I said before, I'm all ears.

Please feel free to expand on these things, I know it would be helpful for me and likely others.