Fierce debate with friend pt. 2

[John_James]

@caulds989

It did piss me off a bit, but if the article does capture the essence of his belief so well, why waste time writing an exact copy.

Well, it’s not about writing an exact copy, it’s about voicing your own argument. My point is, virtually every time someone just links an article and acts as though that were an argument, it’s because he has no argument. Just like Huemer talks about in that lecture. Many people don’t know anything other than what they believe, and can’t explain why they believe it because they didn’t come to that conclusion through any use of rationality or reason. So when faced with opposition they will simply look for confirmation of their belief wherever they can find it, and then present it in place of an actual defense of their position.

If the guy actually had an understanding of his argument he could make it on his own and simply use the article to support it. Otherwise, you may as well just send him links. Sure he won’t read them, but it would save you time. (Of course you could also just move on to better soundingboards and save the time of just trading links).

a) I gain enjoyment from debating him (as an austrian, this should be good enough for you). I feel debating him brings me a marginal benefit higher than any other activity, until it doesn’t anymore.

You don’t have to explain marginal benefit. If you like it, that’s fine. That’s all you have to say. (Although you also admitted it pissed you off too.)

Also, even if he doesn’t really care or chooses to stay irrational I still get smarter from my research, which i believe helps the cause of liberty.

I understand this completely. Glad you see it that way.

Plus, he is a very likable guy, that can think quickly on his feet. He would be good to have on the team. The rest can be taught. Most of us didn’t get here through totally personal logic. people taught us, wether it be through videos, or books, or personal friends. I want to be that friend. If he doesn’t come to see things my way, then at least I received real world objections, that I may not have anticipated if I had not debated him.

Here’s some resources on this:

Arguing with Statists [1] [2]

A model of the liberty message…this is what you can be

This is what you can do with OccupyWallStreet

What you should be doing

What I want from you all: to answer my questions (because I want to learn [isn’t that usually half of the reason why we congregate in this little corner of ours on the net]), expound upon my comments, and correct me where I am wrong. You, in particular, John James probably know much more than I do about the austrian business cycle and can shoot sources on different topics like no one I know. I don’t know how you do it (how do you do it?). and different people answer differently, so if one of you posts and I don’t understand, then another may clarify. Or, one of you expounds upon another. Pretty much the reason why I go to the forum so much now is I got tired of the elementary arguments you hear from the dailies now. they are great as a front page to attract new comers, but after a while the law of diminishing returns takes over, and you seek deeper knowledge. I get that here. I don’t feel i am totally ready for human action, so the forums are a nice medium.

Sounds good. I’ll see what I can do.