In thinking on the classic Sartre quote concerning the folly of arguing with anti-Semites as if they’re arguing in good faith, as well as the Swift quote regarding reasoning being unable to correct an ill opinion one didn’t reason themselves into…It’s left me thinking that perhaps a way to alter the path of those astray is to “play” them out of it, so to speak, but what might this look like?

After all, despite Sartre’s last somewhat optimistic sentence, you may easily find that many that argue in bad faith rarely fall silent for long, if at all, when pressed.

For those unfamiliar, here are the quotes in question:

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.” ― Jean-Paul Sartre

And: “Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired.” ― Jonathan Swift.

(This second one takes on various forms.):::

  • Elise@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    You can if others are paying attention. You can get the other person to display their true selves. So you can convince a third party, and furthermore it can create peer pressure for the bad actor.

    Further, you can decide to focus on the sycophants surrounding them. They’re generally in this follower mode and if you play you cards right their support will buckle.

    Especially effective if you combine the two.