You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: "Synthesizing our way to success!" My in-depth look at the @adamkokesh vs @larkenrose & @kafkanarchy84 debates and the KokeshForPresident campaign

in #anarchy7 years ago

once again this is a great assessment my friend, and while I usually always find something to disagree with in everything that I read, I cant find much here that I am opposed to.

Specificially on the general theme of coming to understanding instead of scoring debate points or trying to 1-up the other person. Sure, there is such a thing as a right and wrong, but if each side goes into a conversation thinking that 100% of their ideas are correct, then there is no hope in either side gaining any understanding. The fact that the debate format gets peoples egos wrapped up in this makes matters even more difficult, because people are always playing to the crowd.

We should be firm in our convictions about what we believe, while at the same time keeping an open mind that we could be wrong.

If conversations were approached this way, I think that both sides would go away learning something, even if their minds arent changed on the root topic

Sort:  

Exactly, well said @johnvibes. Great write-up, Kenny.

Thank you John! That means a lot to me, as you are one of those folks whose take on life and philosophy I greatly respect and enjoy.

That's such a great point! Nobody has to give their idea(l)s, or think that they are incorrect, but by being open to the idea that they may be wrong, even just about some piece of the puzzle, the conversation opens up greatly, as seeking truth becomes the goal, rather than proving that "I'm right and you're wrong"

Some of my most profound breakthroughs have come from the times I've been bouncing back and forth between people who hold many opposed beliefs... and most of the rest have been during conversation with people I disagreed about many things with :-)