While chatting to the Library's IT consultant I was struck by how commonplace argument has become a forum of falsity; not from the consultant's practice, but her account of an exchange over drinks with a person masquerading as a philosopher.
The object of any discussion, to determine what is being talked about, to clarify terms, and to formulate the stronger argument seems to have been abandoned; together with the common courtesy of assuming the other discussant(s) are able to discern non-declared aspects of the cut and thrust of argument.
Now any speaker in this new practice has an agenda, a narrative, to be driven home roughshod over logic, reason, clarity, honesty, hinterland knowledge, or acceptance of the aims or means of discussion (all this apart from both the openly aggressive and the implied rudeness in presentation).
Religion is like this - belief not enquiry, certainty not hypothesis, and the whole persona committed to victory not enlightenment. When this manner of conducting oneself in the world started up again I am unsure; but it will lead to such horrors, has done so already since it was last repelled over 60 years ago.
5 comments:
you get a lot of ground-shifting for the purpose of face-saving too.
Losing an argument or conceding the point in a discussion is hardly losing face. And winning an argument might lead to loss of face. Face-loss is to do with acting shamefully, or being found to hold dishonourable views, or using despicable means.
I shall reread some more Compton-Burnett; she is reliable for examples of face-saving and for doubtful discussion practices. Then I'll put some illuminating quotes up.
It would be interesting to see examples of shifty face-saving from anywhere. All contributions....
Deliberate failure to communicate is a time-honoured strategy for manipulating human relations. As they say in Florentine:
"Dove vai?"
"Son cipolle".
It's extraordinary that wherever we go the Florentines have been there first.
I think it's something to do with their 'pavements like ribbons'; all that walking in single file must provide an environment for reflection at regular intervals throughout the day which, we are assured, is the best way to get thinking results, rather than long periods of effort.
i wish i'd known that one. 'onions, onions' would have been a very satisfying response.
Post a Comment