Asklemmy

43903 readers

1028 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Do I need a good argument for you to respect my opinion? (lemm.ee)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

109 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] [email protected] -20 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (14 children)

But what if my perspective differs?

Argumentation cannot account for that.

Argumentation requires a shared perspective and shared axioms.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 7 months ago (6 children)

If a worldview is devoid of reason and no argument will dissuade the person, all useful dialog is impossible.

[+] [email protected] -15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

It isn't a worldview devoid of reason. It's perfectly good reason based upon a set of assumptions that differ from yours.

Reason is the house. The assumptions is the ground upon which the house is built.

Some ground is rock, some swamp, some flat, sloped... all require different house designs. Dig?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Correct me if I’m wrong, OP, but it sounds like you’re talking about retreating to the axioms of the particular belief system, as in there is a point where reason breaks down because you get to things that you (the person whose expressing their opinion) have accepted that’s different than me.

To me this is a bit of a Motte and Bailey fallacy as your question was whether or not you have a good argument and then someone replied to that and then moved to the set of assumptions which has nothing to do with argument.

For me personally, the other person has to demonstrate some level of critical reasoning for me to respect their opinions, even if their assumptions are different than mine. Beliefs that are entered into using reasoning are more useful than ones without because they can be changed which is what discourse is all about