A framework for productive political discussion
discourse.shwin.co
A framework for productive political discussion
1–4 of 4 posts
Re: A framework for productive political discussion
#2[deleted]
Re: A framework for productive political discussion
#3I'd like to add one that I don't know if it works because sometimes you have to but:
- Do not summarize the opposing point of view beyond the other person's statements.
That one always seems to be the start of a mess. Folks showing up with "I was told..." and so on and it's always some dishonest BS.
Re: A framework for productive political discussion
#4I'd like to add one that I don't know if it works because sometimes you have to but: - Do not summarize the opposing point of view beyond the other person's statements. That one always seems to be the start of a mess. Folks showing up with "I was told..." and so on and it's always some dishonest BS.
Reminds me of this passage from Nassim Taleb's Skin in the Game:
> The great Karl Popper often started a discussion with an unerring representation of his opponent’s positions, often exhaustive, as if he were marketing them as his own ideas, before proceeding to systematically dismantle them. Also, take Hayek’s diatribes Contra Keynes and Cambridge: it was a “contra,” but not a single line misrepresents Keynes or makes an overt attempt at sensationalizing.