“Equivalence” is a destructive insistence, usually by the side tht cannot otherwise justify its…
Steven Mushynsky

However, even if the opposing viewpoint really is wrong, one should still at least come from a point of understanding that viewpoint, seeing how it was reasoned and the flaws in the reasoning, instead of just resorting to “X authority says it’s wrong”, which is a fallacy no matter who uses it. I admit, I’ve fallen for this trap, too. If you try to understand the other view, then if it’s wrong, then your arguments against it will be that much stronger, and if it has anything right in it, then you can modify your view to be better in line with truth, and its truth that ultimately matters here.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

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