Oh, To Be Like Socrates

I really don't want to have a political blog. I don't hate many things in this world, but I genuinely HATE most of the political discussions I read on the Internet. It seems that anyone who offers an opinion, no matter how well reasoned, on either side of any issue is immediately buried by an avalanche of obscenity filled attacks on their intelligence, character and integrity. Even more irritating is the tendency to call someone a "Nazi" or a "fascist" and voila, whatever they say is no longer valid or important enough to be heard. I doubt that most of the people who use those terms so freely even know what they really mean.

There was a time, not long ago, when I subscribed to a fairly decent newspaper - The Dallas Morning News. One of my favorite sections was the Opinion Page and the Letters to the Editor. I enjoyed the give and take on the issues of the day. Even though I am politically conservative I learned to respect (but not agree with) the opinions of some leftward leaning columnists like Richard Cohen, Ellen Goodman and Leonard Pitts. Letters to the Editor were vetted by the editorial board and the really nasty ones weren't usually printed. Also, the letter writer had to include their real name and address. I know this because I wrote a couple of letters over the years and the paper sent me postcards asking me to verify that I had indeed written them.

The Dallas Morning News no longer delivers to my little town so I'm reduced to getting most my news here on the Internet (I refuse to watch TV news. It sucks in so many ways - but that's another post). It seems that every other website has a "comments" section which I suppose is to encourage feedback. Even You-Tube has a comments section, though I can't for the life of me understand why. I finally stopped reading most comments because they are a ridiculous waste of time. Besides being barely literate, most of them are downright foul. It's hard to believe how much enjoyment people seem to get from insulting one another. I'm not afraid of controversy but so called "flame wars" are just a depressing waste of time.

After reading (and commenting) on Martha's blog I'm happy to say that I am pretty impressed by the civility of the discussions. Her readers respect each other enough to refrain from personal attacks even when they strongly disagree with each other. There was a fairly passionate debate with Candy Minx over socialized health care and nary a harsh word or epithet was hurled. When it was over I felt like we were all a little smarter and we certainly had a lot to think about. That's not a bad result.

Whenever I read the harsh invective that passes for political discussion on the web I have to wonder what people are thinking. Have you ever persuaded anyone by pissing them off? I know I haven't, and I've certainly done my share of pissing people off (right Martha?). Instead of winning them over to my point of view it usually results in the other person tuning me out and never listening to me ever again. And even worse, insulting someone because of their opinion (no matter how misguided that opinion may be) is like reading Shakespeare to a pig. It's a complete waste of time and it annoys the pig (I think Mark Twain said this).

Some of the things I've learned (the hard way, of course) over the years: 1) Don't argue with an angry person. You will only make them angrier. 2) Don't argue with a stupid person. It will only drag you down to their level. I've found that when a stupid person tries to stir up controversy it's best to just smile and nod, then change the subject. 3) If you lose your temper, you've probably lost the argument too. 4) You don't win debates by shouting down your opponent. 5) Never ask someone to share their opinion and then attack them for it. This is extremely bad form. 6) If you have to resort to angry personal attacks to make your point then you are probably wrong to begin with. 7) If you question another person's deeply held beliefs, especially their religious (or anti-religious) beliefs, do so with great care and respect, otherwise you will probably lose a friend and you may create an enemy.

If you think about it, isn't the ultimate goal in a debate to win other's to your point of view? What is really the best way to do that? How did you arrive at your own opinions? I think old Socrates had the right idea. He just kept asking questions and let the other person come to his own conclusions. I sincerely wish I had the patience and wisdom to emulate him.