Kaizen1
Gold Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2006
- Messages
- 6,316
People who don't tend to participate in rational, methodical debate tend to feel like they're being threatened or attacked when a claim they make is called into question. All it is is the investigation of the rationale behind the claim to see if it's a reasonable one to hold. Surely if someone started a thread and said that "AUS4 holds a better edge than ZDP189 under all circumstances" we would immediately get a ton of objections to the claim. It wouldn't be unreasonable for other members to request that the person making the claim provide a good reason for saying it. This of course can apply to any claim being made in a given discussion, especially if someone's argument (in which, one is presumably attempting to convince or persuade another) hinges upon such claims. It's not condescending (not in itself at least, people can add attitude to anything they say) nor pretentious. It's simply, "You said this is true. What's your reasoning for saying so?" It should be obvious that not all reasons are equal. Philosophy is pervasive in all intelligible thought. Some people just take that understanding further than others. Attacking philosophy and giving reasons for doing so is like using 2nd grade arithmetic to disprove the validity of quadratic equations. The act itself illustrates one's ignorance on the topic.
