Why Can't others See?

[Ryft]

I don't conflate winning an argument with being right (necessarily) ...

It's not about winning an argument, in my view. To me that seems like the wrong way to look at it. (That's my own perspective. I'm not suggesting that you should adopt my view of things, of course; this is simply an arena where different points of view have the potential to influence our thinking in one way or another.) When it comes to ideas, beliefs, views, etc., I adopt certain scientific principles in my approach; among other things, it has to be free from fatal errors (e.g., contradiction, self-stultification, invalidation, etc.). Since it is probable that I will adopt ideas or views I like (although not always), I have to acknowledge that self-examination is not enough because favourable bias may blind me to a serious problem that someone else might easily see. For this reason I have subjected my ideas and beliefs to the fires of critical discourse, not for the sake of winning a debate—for I'm not trying to convince anyone—but because I want to be made aware of any errors it has, quantitatively (how many the errors) and qualitatively (how serious the errors). And there is no one more able to do that than someone who is an opponent of the idea or belief. If it has either fatal errors or too many significant errors, I will toss it—because I won't be doing myself any favours holding on to ideas or beliefs that are horribly erroneous.

This is the background my question to you came from, when I asked, "If it turned out that your view would not stand up to scrutiny, wouldn't you want to know?" The way I look at the thing, it's not about winning debates or scoring points. It's about finding out if this boat has any holes, because I'm not a fan of sinking.

But like I said, that's my own perspective, and I'm not suggesting that you should adopt it.