I think Sherlock Holmes meant that usually when people
argue, they rely on their emotions, only their own opinions, or things they
hear that are not proven. Instead of using factual information, many let their sentiments
take over and then lose the essence of a logical and sound argument. We can
apply this idea to almost anything from debates during class, arguing with a
friend, elections, etc.
I admit that I have
done it before during my Comm 20 class (public speaking) when I had to persuade
people to oppose the death penalty. Of course I used statistics and situations
that supported my point but I also persuaded them by swaying them emotionally. I
mentioned that it is simply morally wrong to take someone’s life whatever his
or her deeds may be. I questioned if people really have the right to do that
even though a criminal may have killed many. Being a Catholic, I usually stand
by my faith that it is also simply wrong to abort a baby and cease a heartbeat
when a parent does not want it.
However, now I see why some would implement laws supporting
abortion or the death penalty. We really have to look at the situation, break
it down, and figure out what works best. I’m not implying that we can neither
totally support nor totally oppose an issue, but we should fairly consider the
pros and cons of each side. The same should happen in an argument: don’t just
rely on your emotions, your own beliefs, your own thoughts, or rumors. Instead
we should use facts and evidence like scientific information or statistics and
make sure that an argument is not based on just opinions and assumptions.
No comments:
Post a Comment