When Disagreement Isn’t Enough

We are living in an era which has no understanding of what discourse is. That is – people think that having a disagreement or an argument that uses points is essentially discourse. This is not correct. A few things:

1) Discourse doesn’t exist if your goal is to silence your opponent.

Discourse should illuminate your own views and alternate views. Any attempts at silencing someone shows that no efforts are being made to have a true discussion.

2) Discourse doesn’t exist if you aren’t using facts to support factual claims.

Most arguments are a mix of ideology mixed with factual evidence to provide proof of concept. If the factual information is incorrect and the argument turns into a debate about whether science or something else that is not disputable is disputed, then there is no discourse.

3) Discourse doesn’t exist if your arguments rely on wishful thinking or “playing devil’s advocate.”

Discussing an ideal as an obtainable reality because “that’s how things should be” isn’t discourse, it is a conversation-stopper. If there is an ideal you wish to achieve, discuss steps that move you toward it and why that is the ideal you wish to achieve – don’t postulate that it should exist, therefore let’s leap there. Discourse involves confronting reality.

“Devil’s advocate” arguments are meant not to be genuine, if you don’t have a counter to your devil’s advocate argument that you find compelling – then that is your argument. If it isn’t your argument, then don’t waste time on it. Devil’s advocate scenarios are often terrible time wasters that involve intentionally undermining a discussion.

4) Discourse involves staying on topic.

If questions are being asked that change the subject, or minor points are being disputed that don’t change the intellectual thrust of an argument – discourse is being subverted. People who do these things are either willingly derailing conversations as a diversionary tactic to avoid confronting the holes in their logic, or they’re doing it out of habit or impulse. Either way, veering off-path isn’t discourse, it is a massive time waster.

Why does all this matter? Because we waste too much time trying to argue with people who aren’t interested in seeing an idea through from beginning to end. Particularly, arguing with GamerGaters is always an exercise in futility because A) they claim minor supporting evidence to my arguments are major premise points (and then try to pick them apart, often with poor arguments), B) they reject factual and highly supported arguments offhand out of reflex, particularly anything involving social science research, C) they use red herring argument tactics, constantly changing what the conversation is about and always dodging and weaving from confronting specific argument points in a linear fashion, and D) their goal is to dominate/intimidate their opponents, you can’t have a discussion with someone who is trying to shut you up rather than earnestly convince you of their point or consider in good faith the validity of your points.

Pay attention to those who aren’t trying to engage you in discourse, there is no value in arguments with those who don’t have pure motivations in talking with you.

I try to view every conversation as a chance to gather information. What are the values of the person I am talking to? How did they gain those values? Why? How are those values different than mine? etc.

So often I find that GamerGater values slide around as conversations progress, because they aren’t being fully honest with me (and probably themselves) about what motivates them. Of particular note – all of my articles discussing GamerGate behavior related to highlighting their ideology are met with extreme hatred, and are then backed up with little or no evidence beyond name-calling.

I am open to being wrong, we all should be. I’m waiting for a GamerGater to provide a convincing argument of something through a genuine attempt at discourse. I’m waiting. Waiting and waiting and waiting. But I’m not going to waste my time once I see that efforts at discourse are a total waste of time.