When have you been persuaded?

Well, I am not sure about you, but there are many times that I write a well-thought-out response to someone and then never post it because I think “Why bother? What is the point? It’s not like I will change this persons view anyway”.

I am speaking mostly of the rampant political threads that have taken over like locusts. The Trump V Clinton threads are as divisive as it gets. People argue back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, but it always ends right back where things started: The Trump supporters still love Trump, and the Clinton supporters still love Clinton. It all seems so futile. It all seems like one big dead-end. Yet, people keep making and participating in threads like these over and over and over again.

My question to you is, have you ever been persuaded by a persons comments on ATS that caused you to change your views on politics (or anything else)? I’m not talking about “I never had a strong opinion about xyz, but this persons comments makes me HATE xyz”. Rather, have you ever thought to yourself, “Wow, this person made an excellent point about xyz that goes against everything I strongly believe in. I think I may have been wrong about xyz all along. I will now do a complete 180 on my views about xyz.“

If so, when and what did they say that changed your mind? How radically were your opinions influenced? Has anyone lately used pure reasoning to completely change your views about Trump or Clinton? If this has never happened to you, why do you think that is?

I used to not like hillary clinton, but i watched the mainstream news a couple of time and now think shes gonna be the best president ever! That donald guy however, Im not sure exactly what it is he's done wrong, But hes gonna be more terribler than bush.

a reply to: ColaTesla

I'm not sure if this sarcasm or not. I assume it is because allowing the MSM to alter your view is quite the opposite of "denying ignorance".

originally posted by: ksiezyc
a reply to: ColaTesla

I'm not sure if this sarcasm or not. I assume it is because allowing the MSM to alter your view is quite the opposite of "denying ignorance".

That's very true. Unfortunately there is no good evidence that this site does either.

a reply to: primespickle

Happened to me just yesterday.

a reply to: primespickle

I have been influenced by really well-thought-out discourse. I think it matters. What doesn't matter (to me) personally is diatribes that become personal. Almost any time where an ATS member is making a personal comment, I think they have lost whatever ground they hoped to gain.

When folks are commenting on the issues and state their case plainly, I consider it. I will chase down their links, and look it over. I'm always willing to learn.

a reply to: ksiezyc

It was sarcasm, I would never use the word "Terribler" everyone knows the correct word is "worser"

Seriously though, I was trying to think and i can't remember a time when i've been persuaded? I take an interest in very little subjects, but the subjects i do take an interest in, I research well. But when i come to think of it, I can't remember a time when i've persuaded someone either...

My aim is not so much to persuade as it is to understand why someone has chosen that position.

I don't go into it like a zealous evangelist. That way lies insanity because you aren't going to convert the heathen masses. You simply aren't.

There are some people here who have thought very well about why they think and believe the way they do and it is a pleasure to engage with them, but there are plenty of others who don't get quite as far. That's OK though. I still enjoy chatting with them too so long as they aren't too angry about things.

One of the members here that I don't always agree with actually took the time and replied to me in a well thought out manner, as he often does.

I replied with, "I'll rescind my previous statement then and beg to reconsider after reading the ruling."

Even us old folks can learn a new thing or two.

originally posted by: primespickle
Well, I am not sure about you, but there are many times that I write a well-thought-out response to someone and then never post it because I think “Why bother? What is the point? It’s not like I will change this persons view anyway”.

There are 2 ways to discuss things with people:

- You discuss things with the goal being to enrich each others intellect with alternate viewpoints
- you discuss things with the goal being to make others think like you

The first scenario is the correct way to do it. The second scenario is far too ego driven, turning "discussion" into "argument".

My opinion has been swayed regarding the transgender issues.

Personally, I don't post my opinion to sway anyone, it's to state my stance on a given issue. But I don't often post on volatile subject manner, because of the "why bother" mentality that you refer to.

a reply to: primespickle

Several times, I've come close to delivering a virtual "smack upside the head" in the political threads. For example, I've encountered people that are only voting for someone "because she's a woman". I think that anyone who plans to vote for her should read all of the leaked emails. Additionally, she's in the "say what I can to get the votes mode".

I always stop though, because if people can't even bother to look up the facts before choosing who to vote for, well, those people deserve whatever happens as a result of the elections.

I think to date, only one thread has made a dent in my barrier - One of the threads discussed something on Mars that wasn't made out to be Earth-based evolution [strke]fossils[/strke] rocks, but rather something quite unusual. It at least gave me a bit of an open mind within reason (sorry guys, that dinosaur bone is a rock, unless aliens dropped the dino carcass after abducting it).

-fossilera