Not everyone in this world have same thought process. People have different beliefs, which affects the way they think. Different cultures establishes different ideologies and a provides a way to grow by shring those ideologies with fellow humans. Sometimes having different views may result in something beneficiant, or may result in disaster, it all depends on the way the two opposing parties interpret contradicting views. These contradictory views tend to cause an argument. Argument occur when two individuals or groups fight for what they feel is right. Every cogent argument always persuades the opposition in changing his views. An futile argument is just a waste of energy, following are the three reasons for that.
What's the point in arguing when you are not able to persuade someone? People argue when they have conviction their views, they feel that nothing except what they believe is right. Well what if the argument fails in changing the oppositions views? It definitely won't be called as the best argument. The point of arguing with someone is to convince him that what he thinks is wrong. For example: a lawyer will not take a case if they feel that the eveidence is not enough to defend the indicted. Why? Because that will be a waste of his time and energy as he knows that he won't be able to convince the judge to exculpate the felon. There is only one purpose behind arguing that is to change the viewpoint of the opposing. When one knows one cannot achieve that purpose one should not argue.
Even though the argument is based on fallacious evidence, it would still be regarded as a good argument if it is convincing. Lawyers are the epitome, when it comes to arguments. A lawyer defending a murdered, if does a good job, could free the felon from lifetime imprisonment or maybe death sentence. Although he is supporting a bad guy, to win he would require to produce a cogent case. In the end, if he is successful in convincing the judge or the jury about the murderer's innocence, his argument would be regarded as the better one.
So it proves that the best arguments always convince any person with opposing views.
Not everyone in this world have same
thought
process.
People
have
different
beliefs, which affects the way they
think
.
Different
cultures establishes
different
ideologies and a provides a way to grow by
shring
those ideologies with fellow humans.
Sometimes
having
different
views
may result in something
beneficiant
, or may result in disaster, it all depends on the way the two opposing parties interpret contradicting
views
. These contradictory
views
tend to cause an
argument
.
Argument
occur when two individuals or groups fight for what they feel is right. Every cogent
argument
always persuades the opposition in changing his
views
.
An
futile
argument
is
just
a waste of energy, following are the three reasons for that.
What's the point in arguing when you are not able to persuade someone?
People
argue when they have conviction their
views
, they feel that nothing except what they believe is right. Well what if the
argument
fails in changing the oppositions
views
? It definitely won't
be called
as the best
argument
. The point of arguing with someone is to convince him that what he
thinks
is
wrong
.
For example
: a lawyer will not take a case if they feel that the
eveidence
is not
enough
to defend the indicted. Why?
Because
that will be a waste of his time and energy as he knows that he won't be able to convince the judge to exculpate the felon. There is
only
one purpose behind arguing
that is
to
change
the viewpoint of the opposing.
When
one knows one cannot achieve that purpose one should not argue.
Even though
the
argument
is based
on fallacious evidence, it would
still
be regarded
as a
good
argument
if it is convincing. Lawyers are the epitome, when it
comes
to
arguments
. A lawyer defending a murdered, if does a
good
job, could free the felon from lifetime imprisonment or maybe death sentence. Although he is supporting a
bad
guy, to win he would require to produce a cogent case. In the
end
, if he is successful in convincing the judge or the jury about the murderer's innocence, his
argument
would
be regarded
as the better one.
So
it proves that the best
arguments
always convince any person with opposing
views
.