But what if the other side has absolutely no arguments?
Henrique Machado

I think I understand where you’re coming from, Henrique, but I will respectfully posit that *any* position can be argued from (at least) two sides.

Will all of those arguments be equally defensible morally or factually? Of course not. But they are arguments all the same. I could argue that Pol Pot was a visionary, Hitler saved lives and Che Guevara was a role model. I wouldn’t believe any of my own arguments, but I could put together such arguments.

Think of it as defense counsel in a court of law. The advent of CourtTV (thanks, Nancy Grace!) has shown us all court cases where the “criminal” is obviously guilty. Yet, it’s important — fundamental even — that a criminal defense is presented. Not only does this protect the rights of law-abiding citizens, but it also keeps the prosecution honest and ensures they don’t become lazy — even in a “slam dunk” case. The result is (hopefully) a well-formed argument on both sides and a more-educated populace.

We must be able to perform the mental exercise of arguing alternative viewpoints (regardless how distasteful they may be to us personally). The end result will be a strengthening of our own arguments and, perhaps, an unexpected empathy for the viewpoints of others.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.