No. It's just that... I try these days to look at the space BETWEEN extreme
sides of arguments. Usually you find that two people are forced into extreme
positions, when it's very likely that the argument would be better resolved
with a mix of the two positions, a compromise/average position between the
two, or neither of the extremes.
A lot of the time, I think that debate based on Good/Bad is actually less
useful than saying, "Both/neither of these things exist (at different
strengths at different times)."
I've had, for instance, a couple of nice cognitive dissonance episodes
recently, which is where you think, "shit, something seems to be X, but then
it also seems to be Not X", and the answer has never been 100% X and it's
never been 100% Not X, it's been kinda halfway, or
neither-and-both-at-the-same-time, or it's been "X sometimes and Not X other
times".
I think that a lot of debate gets MORE useful when you let go of arguing one
pole of an argument (wish I could practise what I preach here...).
ESPECIALLY when one pole is "X is Good" and the other is "X is Bad".
...Which is where I was coming from. Anyway, I thought you LIKED the idea
of Zen? :)
Dave Pape
==========================================================================
I am ready.
Phonecalls: 0118 9583727 Phights: 20 Armadale Court
Westcote Road
Reading RG30 2DF