Total Posts:2|Showing Posts:1-2
Jump to topic:

Thesis and Antithesis Equals New Thesis

s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 3:30:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The reason for disagreement should not be for its own sake. The goal of not agreeing with someone else should be to provide another perspective, another vantage point, on the consideration of a commonly held phenomenon. In considering each point of view, the debater's argument in order to develop must take on that with which he, or she, disagrees; in other words, the debater must consider all sides of an argument in order to honestly refute it. It is with an honest appreciation for contrasting views one's beliefs begin to take shape.

Beliefs that are not brought into doubt or beliefs free from questioning are not beliefs, at all. Any belief that is so unstable it dares not subject itself to scrutiny has very little assurance. The belief that can stand in the face of doubt, like gold before the refiner's fire withstanding the burning away of impurities, is that which is a sincere and an honest belief. Sincere beliefs are never left alone; they are found with much doubt and questioning. They evolve and change, leaving behind those things once held with confidence, only, to fall away as other beliefs proved stronger.

Every thesis is the synthesis of a former thesis with its antithesis. Everything is defined by that which it is not.
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2015 3:48:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/1/2015 3:30:30 AM, s-anthony wrote:
The reason for disagreement should not be for its own sake. The goal of not agreeing with someone else should be to provide another perspective, another vantage point, on the consideration of a commonly held phenomenon. In considering each point of view, the debater's argument in order to develop must take on that with which he, or she, disagrees; in other words, the debater must consider all sides of an argument in order to honestly refute it. It is with an honest appreciation for contrasting views one's beliefs begin to take shape.

Beliefs that are not brought into doubt or beliefs free from questioning are not beliefs, at all. Any belief that is so unstable it dares not subject itself to scrutiny has very little assurance. The belief that can stand in the face of doubt, like gold before the refiner's fire withstanding the burning away of impurities, is that which is a sincere and an honest belief. Sincere beliefs are never left alone; they are found with much doubt and questioning. They evolve and change, leaving behind those things once held with confidence, only, to fall away as other beliefs proved stronger.

Every thesis is the synthesis of a former thesis with its antithesis. Everything is defined by that which it is not.

Na, debating is similar to chess, the better man wins, not necessarily the better cause. And the Truth is the Truth no matter what the Truth is, and is what one believes, the Truth? And two, once hearing or coming into contact with what is the Truth, does one really believe, or even value the Truth in order to continue to believe the Truth, even tough one has come to know the Truth? Therefore what is the verification that one knows the Truth?

If one is a parent, and one"s child is being deceived to it"s own detriment, what would one do to the deceiver given the opportunity to do so? One might rip his heart out, and show it to him before he died. So to justify deceiving is a game of self delusion. Granted "iron sharpeneth iron" but it"s a believer that makes the other believer stronger, not "mud shapeneth iron", not a non-believer makes a believer stronger. It"s a successful soldier that teaches the untrained to do well, not the objector that refuses to be a soldier.