“However, you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Those who hold their position as an article of faith only are always going to struggle to explain and defend their position. They don’t have an underlying rationale as to why they hold that position in the first place, which is one of the reasons we end up with meaningless TWAW slogans.”
Yes. This is important.
Therefore to convince others, they have to use some form of emotional reasoning, at times manipulation such as shame.
I am always keen to see if there is evidence that underpins the opinion and what it is that convinced someone. Sometimes that way we also get to see some new papers, studies, or points that haven’t yet been considered. I do live in hope.
While some people feel that their evidence gets pulled apart, the reality is that if that evidence doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, it is weak. Even if what we have is just a thought, or a grouping of weaker evidence that stands up logically and can be used for inference in the absence of clear evidence to support a specific statement, that is well worthy of consideration.
If you, general you, don’t have confidence about the evidence withstanding scrutiny and analysis, why would you hold an opinion so strongly? I am very keen to have evidence I present evaluated. Because when I look at the criticism of the evidence, I can judge if I have made an error in my understanding of it, or if I just need to work harder to find the truth amongst the mass of misinformation we are presented with from media and even sources we should find reliable every day. This is the way I learn new stuff every day.
I did used to think this was a common approach until I struck the mantra of ‘TWAW’. Now, I think it is not quite as common as I believed.