[user104658]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Well that's pretty standard for some topics.

When I did Philosophy at Uni level, one of the first things they taught on the subject (which is, effectively, the study of thinking) is that there are no "wrong answers", only "poor arguments". That a stance you don't agree with should still be respected if the person stating it can explain their reasoning and logic well. You'll find that eventually there's a premise that you disagree on and that leads to the divergence of opinion, but that's OK... It's still a well reasoned personal opinion.

If someone CANNOT or REFUSES TO do that then in all likelihood, the opinion hasn't been formed by themselves, it's been indoctrinated by or copied from someone else.

I wonder if they still teach that? I imagine there'd be a lot of kickback...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

When I did Philosophy at Uni level, one of the first things they taught on the subject (which is, effectively, the study of thinking) is that there are no "wrong answers", only "poor arguments". That a stance you don't agree with should still be respected if the person stating it can explain their reasoning and logic well. You'll find that eventually there's a premise that you disagree on and that leads to the divergence of opinion, but that's OK... It's still a well reasoned personal opinion.

If someone CANNOT or REFUSES TO do that then in all likelihood, the opinion hasn't been formed by themselves, it's been indoctrinated by or copied from someone else.

I wonder if they still teach that? I imagine there'd be a lot of kickback...

Well Kathleen Stock was a professor of Philosophy so......... I'd imagine she tried to teach that in her class before her students decided that's not how it should be taught