"Why should incest remain a criminal offence."
"It is disgusting."
"Why?"
"It goes against society and what is natural."
"Why?"
"Because there are certain things you do and do not do."
"Why?"
"That's just how it is."
"Why?"
"I don't know."
Most arguments can be entirely debunked simply by placing the onus of proof onto your opponent. As Dawkins argues in his fabulous 'God Delusion', when logic dictates that one side's opinion supersedes that of the other, why must the winner strive to prove his argument in the face of the mindless lunacy from the opposition? My position is logical and rationalised, well thought-out, and justified: there's is merely emotion. Why should I make my case, when I can watch theirs crumble so rapidly without even breaking an intellectual sweat? I could make my case -- and that is the important thing.
"Why should it remain a criminal offence?"
"Because it can produce deformed babies."
"So can genes found in fat and black people."
"Well, people should be punished for going against nature."
"So prison is merely a punishment and has no rehabilitative element?"
"True."
"There are cases where estranged siblings meet and fall in love [another person chimes in]."
"Precisely."
Yeah. I don't want to bang on about it ad infinitum. but I feel it is necessary to show that with rigorous use of "why" you can actually do something. Admittedly, changing one mind is not exactly ground-breaking conversion. But, hey, out of the four possibles I got one. That's not a bad ratio. These are exciting times, evidently. The thing that I need to keep doing - and I urge you to do the same if you agree with me (on anything) - is forcing home my point. I want to convert: that doesn't make me a bad person, or a fundamentalist -- why have an opinion if you're not prepared to defend it, and if by doing so change a few people's minds? There is definitely an incipient willingness to change. I am merely going to water, plough, and sow these little buds of inchoate recognition - watching them burst forth. I am different from a religious extremist, fundamentalist, preacher, or even believer -- I think my opinion is evidenced and reasoned; defined by logic. If I was merely saying these things because I think they're true, then I would be no better than a man who indoctrinates his children to his ideology. I don't think I am that. It seems small-scale, but a rebellion is not built in a day. Nor was Rome, by the way. No, look, I have no real grand scheme here but these kind of things validate having the opinion in the first place. I am not prepared to lead an intellectually cloistered life: having opinions just for the sake of my self. That's erroneous and fundamentally opposed to what an opinion should be: the groundwork for propaganda. LET US REVOLT, PEASANTS ETC.. Yeah. Boring day.
And round the round, have you noticed that I am posting more than one a day? Not sure how I've managed that. 13 in 12. Oh. I suppose that one was 'pre-May'? Not sure. Whatever, I do what I want. It has been a good month, I feel.
Any feedback?
No comments:
Post a Comment