True. To do that would require people being prepared to make concessions like: to concede that they may not be totally correct, to concede that the other person may have a point to conceded that their version of other people could be wrong to actually think for themselves, rather than just parroting whatever ideology they were taught. And that's just for starters.
You have to listen to the 'other side' if you want to move onwards and hopefully upwards. You can't understand what you ignore. As much as I don't like Ben 'my wife is a doctor' Shapiro he does make some good points. Not to Andrew Neil obvs.
Ignoring the word politics, you have just summed up Dull in a single post. I think I’m going to like you being around
Why she thought she could out psyche a psychologist, especially one like him says a lot for her arrogance. I did see a conversation between Peterson and Mat Dillahunty, and Dillahunty made Peterson look quite lightweight. Then again, it was a fairly loaded topic, as Peterson was effectively tasked with proving God exists, and that's pretty much Mat's stock in trade. It was interesting all the same.
Andrew the lefty? I tend to seek out views that oppose my initial perception just to see if there's a better or alternative way of viewing things. If you don't know where someone is arguing from, it's difficult to get a decent level of engagement, especially as some fields of study have different meanings for some words and phrases.
He reads the other person so well, as you'd expect, so he knows pretty much where they're heading, often before they do.
@Charlie1 QED. "Too easy" = a fortnight or more of begging for attention, to try to regain some credibility after almost a decade of **** ups.
I wouldn't wish the outcome of that on anyone tbf, not even Dull. I just hope when the time comes he puts down the gun and seeks counselling instead
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. Mark Twain
