Difference between revisions of "Arguments as soldiers"

From Lesswrongwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(+related)
(conceptual metaphor, lk to adversarial system)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
'''Arguments as soldiers''' is an alternate label for a [[conceptual metaphor]] which is more commonly stated as '''"Argument is War/Battle"'''.  This metaphor is at the core of the [[adversarial system]] of debate which is widespread in politics, law and academia.  However, it is immature to hold on to this framework for private or deliberative decision making:
 +
 
Identifying yourself with a [[color politics|side]] in a political debate may be [[mind-killer|detrimental]] to rational evaluation of arguments. Arguments get treated as soldiers, weapons to be used to defend your side of the debate, and to attack the other side. They are no longer instruments of the [[truth]].
 
Identifying yourself with a [[color politics|side]] in a political debate may be [[mind-killer|detrimental]] to rational evaluation of arguments. Arguments get treated as soldiers, weapons to be used to defend your side of the debate, and to attack the other side. They are no longer instruments of the [[truth]].
  

Revision as of 01:03, 5 October 2009

Arguments as soldiers is an alternate label for a conceptual metaphor which is more commonly stated as "Argument is War/Battle". This metaphor is at the core of the adversarial system of debate which is widespread in politics, law and academia. However, it is immature to hold on to this framework for private or deliberative decision making:

Identifying yourself with a side in a political debate may be detrimental to rational evaluation of arguments. Arguments get treated as soldiers, weapons to be used to defend your side of the debate, and to attack the other side. They are no longer instruments of the truth.

Blog posts

See also