Quote:
And, I'll still argue with you when I think you're wrong.
Rad, I'm not intending to single you out here, but I'd like to use this statement you happened to say to illustrate two points useful to all of us.
The first point is that the effective object of this statement is in the second person - the argument is with a specific person. I think that though this is a natural way to think, it's not helpful. It makes the argument into a wrestling match between people, instead of an examination of an idea. It is possible to disagree with an idea, or point out flaws in it, without making it an attack on the person who presented the idea. I would urge us all to try to do that.
The second point is the reason presented for arguing: "when I think you're wrong". Though again it is a natural impulse to express disagreement when we disagree, the latter doesn't logically compel the former. Sometimes there is nothing to be gained by expressing disagreement, and it is better to remain silent. It is a bigger step again from expressing disagreement to arguing - to attempting to convince people that our idea is right and the other is wrong. I would suggest that it goes beyond the purpose of this board to attempt to do that in matters of religion. I think we need to accept that our beliefs differ and will continue to differ.