In article <4a84735b@news.povray.org>,
Mike Raiford wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> 
>> Where he got his interest is irrelevant.  We all learn from our families 
>> and our friends.  So what?  The reason the kid is exercising his free 
>> speech is not important.  He should be allowed to do so, as long as he's 
>> not disruptive or inciting people to harm others.
>
> True, but I still don't think it's appropriate to attempt to convert 
> other students to your form of religion, be it atheist, christian, 
> jewish or muslim. There should be a respect for what others believe.

I'm against all forms of persuasion. 

I find that actually a good way to live. You present the facts, and
speak your mind. Done. I don't see ``debates'' as something very
useful.[*]

I don't actually think that there is true persuasion. I say if you
convinced someone, only fooled them. But if you contributed for them
to truly understand something and in the end they really agree with
you, then I guess you're theory truly works --- well, at least some
think so. (I don't mean I can precisely distinguish persuasion from
communication, but I trust you get the idea.)

[*] If see a bad argument somewhere (going somewhere), and I can fix
it, I make it better for myself and share it with others. What the
others do is up to them --- plus, I'd like to use my time for good
things; some people already have their minds made, and are only
looking for arguments that sustain that. That's how debates should be,
IMO. If I see a very good argument somewhere, I make it mine first,
because that is the best way to investigate it.

Post a reply to this message