What you believe isn’t the point.
And yet your response validates it as a point. I believe I have made a point.
The point is that when we do no bother to clarify, or ask for clarification, people will tend to just assume whatever they want. And often that will be derogatory.
Often I see response in kind to absolutist positions that are not offered kindly or with any reason, but with the implied or stated declaration that those not meeting the conditions are all wrong. How much clarification is needed to understand that?
We are all free to believe whatever we choose.
I agree.
When someone bothers to tell us what they believe, we are free to ask them about it because their telling us implies that they want us to know about it.
I agree.
This does not imply, however, that they are seeking our agreement, or a debate.
That they put it in the public square with the history of what happens when that occurs leaves it subject to questioning, rejection and debate. On here, if statements are placed in areas that not for debate, then that what you say would be consistent.
We would engage them to better understand and appreciate their position.
I have no disagreement and that really isn't the crux of my response.
I see no point in challenging them unless they are seeking our opinion
Again, I have seen otherwise. I maintain that placing opinions in areas of debate is implicit acceptance that a post is going to be debated.
No, it’s not. Asking a question is just asking a question. It’s just seeking more information.
It is both and doesn't require your recognition for that state to exist.
Learning does not require debate. It doesn’t ever require that we offer an opinion.
Not anything I claimed.
Most of the time, no one is asking us for any of that. And when we insist on offering it anyway, it appears that we think we are their better. Mostly because we do think that.
We are talking about context here. And the context is one of debate and the presumption of insult for what appears merely to be disagreement.
Yes. That would be both the wise and polite thing to do. When someone says “I believe X” we should accept that they believe it. Our opinion of their belief in X has not been sought.
I disagree. Wild claims should be challenged or there is the risk that misinformation will become cemented into the subject being discussed and debated. Yielding to the least common denominator is destructive and not creative and of no value to anyone.
Why do you presume yourself to be in charge of validating the beliefs of others?
Having knowledge that others don't is not a presumption. The discussion here is about claims of fact. Why are you presuming and avoiding when the subject is a science that you are not an expert at and the point highlighted is valid? This seems to be hand waving to wipe away a valid point without proper address.
Why can’t you just accept that they believe what they believe and move on? Whether you agree with it or not?
Accepting that someone believes something isn't the question. I do accept that they believe it. I can also recognize what they believe to be fact is erroneous and challenge that with questions and verifiable statements of fact.
Unsolicited challenges are insulting. Yes.
Within the proper context, I agree. In a debate forum, that seems entirely out of order.
You are continuing to presume that every statement of belief is a ”claim” and that you are somehow responsible for validating it.
A statement is a claim. That I believe in X is a statement of fact. That I believe that others that don't believe the way I do will suffer some consequence is debatable. I am recognizing the difference and not putting myself in a position of validation. Are you?
They aren’t, and you aren’t.
Again, challenging statement of fact with superior knowledge is not presumption and to let it without challenge might even be more wrong. In that context, yes, a person that knows more than the one making the claim of fact should respond.
It generally is and should be respected here and everywhere.
What I see are people providing sincere belief that is counter to the beliefs of others and those providers do not always provide it with the sensitivity presumed and often respond badly when what they provide isn't swallowed whole and without question.
The salesman is not insisting that I buy anything. So I have no reason to debate with him about it. If he did insist, I would just refuse and walk away.
The salesman is insisting. I can't see you just walking away. The point was that you do not make a purchase simply on the word of someone with a vested interest in getting you to follow them and not just to comply with anything anyone says about what they are selling.
No. In most instances it is not.
Not in this context it is not. And that is the context of this discussion.
I find I’d very odd that you are having so much trouble understanding this.
I know you do. That seems to be part of the problem and the intent of your post more than a proper reading of what we are discussing.
You seem to be very addicted to the idea that you are in charge of judging what everyone else thinks and believes,
Now I am an addict and self-appointed judge. Now we are seeing the part that prompted my questions in the first place. When pressed, this is more often the sort of response that people claiming belief in a debate have when their beliefs are not swallowed whole.
to the point where you presume that if they dare to speak of it, you must correct them.
If people make erroneous statements of fact or untestable claims, then they should be addressed. You are addressing me to correct what you see as flaws and have appointed yourself to do so.
I find this to be very a unwise presumption.
I find what you are trying to sell here unwise presumption. Posting opinion and belief in a debate with the expectation that such will stand unchallenged doesn't make a lot of sense. It appears to be naive and unrealistic to me. I think that would be a common recognition.
I’m getting better at letting go of that urge.
I continue to hope and pray that you do.
And I think this would be a better site if we all tried to be more careful in this regard
That door swings two ways.