Don > I have a rather high opinion of open debate. My view is if a point is valid, it will eventually be established as such. If a thing is not true, it doesn't become more true by inhibiting debate on the subject
Or by insulting the one who has made the point. In fact, this seems so characteristic of much of the political and other debate which is now taking place, as if all that matters is to win the debate by fair means or foul. I imagine there was a time when "gentlemen" would debate and discuss any subject, and from any position, with the idea that what was important was the the intellectual challenge and the knowledge acquired.
Today, that's no longer possible. Many subjects are taboo and opinions which are not Politically Correct are considered as anti-this or anti-that -- usually racist or anti-Semitic. And, most unfortunately, it seems one is forced to be emotionally and personally involved in any position one takes. For example, if one expresses the view that the WTC was demolished with explosives, one is considered to be un-American, anti-American, unpatriotic, pro-terrorist, a wacko, a sick liberal etc. The merits of the argument are thus irrelevant and one is compelled to defend one's own bona fides against the ad hominem attack and personal slur. |
