by J. Young

Created on: August 20, 2008

There is always more than one 'right' answer

The more that I have written on Helium, the more I have found that I especially enjoy arguing for the least popular perspective on any given issue; regardless if I agree with the popular opinion, or I am vehemently against it. This isn't because I like to start fights, and I am not a devil's advocate, per se. The reason I enjoy standing on the side that is least popular, is because my ability to understand that every issue has more than one valid argument is essential to refining the beliefs that I hold to be true. That is, by effectively arguing for my opposition, I will be more affective when I argue for my position.

It's not about 'who beats who'

It is said (though I have no idea by who) that, 'to the victor go the spoils.' But in an argument, the only way to win is to convince the other side that you have a valid argument. Not to subdue them with your arguing ability, or make them agree with you by tricking them. Bullying is bullying. If it's a bigger kid punching a smaller kid, or a more aggressive arguer attacking a passive one: Making someone submit to your whims, be it through force or trickery, is wrong.

That being said, no one should ever walk away from an argument with a feeling of disgust, helplessness, or a general feeling that they're stupid. That doesn't help anybody. It doesn't spread an altruistic message; in fact, it seems to lack any purpose at allother than an inflated ego for the winner. Alternatively, it is in the arguers' best interest if both parties walk away from an argument with a feeling of empowerment. That they've learned, and that they are growing. Or that they can change something. Making somebody submit to your point is different than having someone adopt your point as their own.

Defining your terms

Often, if you define what your terms, you will find that your opinions are very much the same. A person arguing against the Republican Party, for example, may feel that Republicans care more about the rights of corporations than the needs of individuals. But it would be difficult to find a person that would say that a building or a bunch of people dressed in suits are more important than everybody else. More often than not, the debate between conservative and liberal economic ideologies are hinged upon whether a strong economy benefits the people, therefore, we should encourage a strong economy for the benefit of the people; or, the people benefit the economy, and, therefore, we should support the people for a strong economy. (This is probably an over-simplification; but it's only meant for illustrative purposes.)

The word 'Republican', for some people, draws an image in their mind of a gun-toting, anti-humanist, who is married to his sister. For others, a 'Republican' can symbolize the virtues of family and friends, and may be the optimization of safety, and serenity. It is important to regard people as having values that are independent of labels (like Republican or Democrat) and see them more as autonomous creatures with their own vision of the meaning of 'morality' and 'intelligence.'

A short summary

There is no right answer. If there were, somebody a lot smarter than any of us would have figured things out a long time ago; and there would be no reason for discussion. So, make sure that you and the person you are arguing are both benefiting from the conversation. If that's not the case, than you probably should think about refining your methods of argument. If you're both learning and growing as individuals, than it shouldn't matter that your opinion differs.

Learn more about this author, J. Young.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.