On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Gomi no Sensei wrote: > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Steve Brust wrote: > > > More, I contend such arguments are worth having. Because through them > > something can be *settled* and *solved*? No. Because through them, > > knowledge and understanding can be developed and increased. > > If an argument isn't being had to settle and solve an issue, there's precious > little point in having one. Knowledge and understanding are hardly to be > had in the presence of continued ambiguity. Oh, I've had arguments which didn't solve anything but taught me stuff about the subject - e.g., I've never solved the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but I've learned from those I've sparred with, gaining both knowledge (about history) and understanding (why the other side feels aggrieved). I've also had arguments which taught me I shouldn't discuss certain subjects with certain people...