one online discussion forum i frequent is geared towards players of RPGs. i’ve spent since the summer of 1998 there and one particular forum is geared to a more free-form kind of discussion that isn’t about gaming per se: it’s about the issues of the day or things that matter to the folks there. it’s been a great way to get a re-education in the art of the argument: how to read one, how to present one and how to defend one.
modesty aside, i’m generally pretty good at this. when i take the time to construct an argument, i am careful (generally) about taking a position that doesn’t reach too far. i also am generally pretty good at recognizing when an argument is destined to end in agreeing to disagree: the underlying assumptions are sometimes just too disparate to permit much meaningful discussion and in the kinds of topics that arise online, that happens a lot.
despite being asian, i generally suck at math. i just do. i use spreadsheets or calculators to do math for me b/c i dislike it so. but the math class at which i did least poorly was geometry, b/c that was where i first learned the logical structure of a proof. i understood that if you are given certain underlying assumptions (formally called givens), the proof itself is nothing but pure logic, and that appealed to me. it was my first glimpse into why mathematicians can call a proof beautiful.
i find that i take for granted the fact that if i make an argument, i lay out my objective, my supporting reasons and/or any supporting facts (e.g., polls, quotations or the like) and my conclusion. i similarly take it for granted that these things must all logically follow. and i take for granted that when i have done so, someone who wishes to dispute the validity of the argument must attack the supporting evidence or the flow of logic in order to make a valid point, as the argument presented ought to be free of errors.
that i take these things for granted is evidently bad. i say that b/c in talking w/ a friend—an instructor by trade—some weeks ago, i was horrified to learn that the majority of the students w/ whom my friend dealt did not understand the concept of creating an argument and why mere opinion doesn’t matter. and we’re not talking about elementary or high school students: the students in question are (ostensibly) college students!
while that’s clearly some kind of failure on the students’ part or perhaps the education system’s, the fact remains that these kids are going to enter the workforce without much familiarity in the use of the rather indispensable tool we know as logic. how these kids reached the age of 18 and fail to understand how to make an argument…after all, most writing assignments they would have gotten in high school depended upon being able to do this.
i can only shake my head sadly at such news. i don’t understand how it’s possible for someone to think that presenting nothing but opinion constitutes an argument. i mean, sure, i guess it’s funny for a blogger to rail about the uselessness of opinion, but you know, i don’t care: i’m capable of distinguishing b/n facts and opinions.
so am i just taking myself too darned seriously, or have you, too, noticed a dearth of good arguments? is the beauty of a proof something that makes sense or is it just so much “blah blah blah”? comment and let me know.
ed
