[MD] For Bo

[Ian Glendinning]

Yes it should DM, agreed.

I said "understanding the actual disagreement is part of finding out
.... etc..."

I would add one more general item to your list ....

Differences in the "basis of belief" / "basis of understanding"

I wouldn't use "irrational" for the "feeling" based understandings,
the emotional ones, but these do tend to be the ones concerned with
the participants themselves rather than their arguments.

Ian

On 8/23/08, David M <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Ian/SA
>
> Should not disagrement aim to reach an understanding of
> where the difference is. What sort of differences? These maybe:
>
> Different experience
> Different values
> Different interpretation/value of experience
> Different split between possible/impossible
> Different definitions
> Irrational feelings of difference when there is none (DMB)
>
> anything else?
>
> DM
>
>
>
> >
> > Hi SA, must have missed it ... interesting question.
> >
> > Of course I value disagreement over matters of substance, it's an
> > opportunity to find new agreement ... and "keep the dialogue going"
> > whilst we do so. I can't believe I've ever said anything like "and
> > we'll all agree" ... 'cos I certainly don't believe that ... that
> > would be like "agreeing to disagree", which is only ever a temporary
> > "holiday" in pragmatic terms.
> >
> > There are certain kinds of disagreement that I generally avoid /
> > object to, particularly by e-mail, better over a beer or a walk in the
> > woods. Two main kinds ....
> >
> > (1) Negative accusations over the integrity, motives and personal
> > character of your interlocutor. These are ad hominem attacks - a
> > no-no. Should be moderated.
> >
> > (2) Debates that start from political ideological premises. Which I
> > tend to avoid rather than object too, just a matter of preference ...
> > not enough time in the world in my mind to progress these beyond
> > sloganizing, slanging-matches, unless the intelocutor shows intent to
> > drop lay the ideological points aside from the argument.
> >
> > Basically, it's a question of motive SA. My motive in argumentation is
> > to find something, anything, worth agreeing, adding value to the
> > world, not to "avoid" argument or explanation. I avoid (some)
> > arguments that look unlikley to add any value, for practical reasons
> > of bandwidth and sanity.
> >
> > As I have said before Mary Parker-Follett, would be my archetype, in
> > my position on the subject of disagreement and argumentation. Hope
> > that helps. What was the context of your original question ?
> > Ian
> >
> > On 8/22/08, Heather Perella
> <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Ian,
> > >
> > >    I recently had a question for you, but heard no response.  Don't know
> if you saw it or not.  I asked you (since your a proponent of a certain
> middle way) if you value disagreement, or if it goes against your grain? I
> know you like to say stuff like 'dialog long enough and we'll find we all
> agree', and seem to be against people disagreeing with each other on this
> forum.  Curious.
> > >
> > >
> > > SA
> > >
> > >
> > > --- On Fri, 8/22/08, Ian Glendinning <ian.glendinning at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Ian Glendinning <ian.glendinning at gmail.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [MD] For Bo
> > > > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > > > Date: Friday, August 22, 2008, 5:02 AM
> > > > Actually, Ron, SA,
> > > >
> > > > Godel's argument concerns any formal system of logic
> > > > (not just
> > > > mathematics per se) ... but it doesn't change your
> > > > point, since the
> > > > argument was part of the debate about whether mathematics
> > > > and logic
> > > > resolve to the same thing.
> > >
> > n it is only a rarely used and one of
> >
> >
> > > > many,
> > > > > methods of reasoning.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > > > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > > > >
> > > >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > > > Archives:
> > > > >
> > > >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> > > > >
> > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > > >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > > Archives:
> > > >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > Archives:
> > >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> > >
> > >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> >
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >
> >
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>