Here’s a flowchart demonstrating a structured approach to discussing ideas, one that is conducive to resolving disagreements. (This is no quick fix, so no promises of the form “Make everyone agree within a record period of time!” are made. My sole claim is that it’s an approach that is better than other approaches. If it takes more than (1,000) pages for people to come to agreement using this approach, it merely means that other approaches would have taken much longer than that.)
Ecmandu loves algorithms, so he should be able to appreciate this flowchart:
How to Discuss Ideas
It’s a pretty simple flowchart, actually.
So when I say that someone did not address a claim I made, I am simply saying that they did not follow the steps outlined in this algorithm.
The key part is the idea that the right way to respond to mere assertions is different from the right way to respond to arguments.
For example, if I make a statement that (0.9 \neq 1), without explaining how I arrived at such a conclusion, the adequate way to respond to it, in case you disagree with it, is by offering a counter-argument i.e. by providing an argument that proves that (0.9 = 1). For example:
(3 \times \frac{1}{3} = 1)
(\frac{1}{3} = 0.333\dots)
(3 \times \frac{1}{3} = 3 \times 0.333\dotso = 0.999\dotso)
Therefore, (1 = 0.999\dotso).
Whether or not the argument is sound, whether or not its conclusion is true, whether or not the person understood the original claim and whether or not the person presenting such an argument is stupid or smart are completely irrelevant. The response is an adequate one for the simple reason that it provides a counter-argument to a previously made claim.
However, that wouldn’t be a proper response in the case I offered the following argument . . .
- (1) is a number
- (0.999\dotso) is not a number because it does not end
- A number cannot be equal to something that is not a number
- Therefore, (1) is not equal to (0.999\dotso)
Here, you have to show what’s WRONG with the presented argument and not merely argue against the conclusion. You have to explain why you think the argument is UNSOUND. Is it logically invalid? If so, why? Are there any premises that are false? If so, which ones and why?
But if all you do is COMPLAIN about how other people are not up to your expectations, then you will get nowhere. You will waste your time and even achieve the opposite of what you wanted to achieve in the first place.