If we know that knowledge is acquired faster and better through positive experiences, why do we still insist upon defending arguments (here and in RL) as educational?

I don’t think anyone in that situation is thinking about gain at that moment. It’s just a simple loss of control. Emotions trumping logic. At least, that’s what it is when it happens with me…

@augustlan I don’t know whether you’ve been to wis.dm, but it’s very open and unmoderated. The fighting and swearing that go on there would make a truckdriver’s prostitute, who wasn’t paid and then got her foot run over, blush.

There was only one redeeming thing: the block feature, which didn’t allow the blockee to post on your questions. Thus, you had to fight elsewhere, on other’s posts. It would mean that you were “looking” for trouble.

Honestly, the things said there I wonder who would say them in public – to someone’s face?

What would they gain, there or in real life? The things people allow themselves to get away with here (online, i.e.)...

The trick is to keep a cool head, not let it turn into a shouting match, defend your positions logically, and make the discussion a positive experience.

Tragically, most people aren’t so good at that.

I have never heard actual arguments defended as educational. But good questions are certainly a path to education. An open, seeking mind challenges received wisdom, tests propositions vigorously, and asks those who assert conclusions to show evidence and expose their inductive or deductive process. Those who question should expect also to be questioned. The give and take is good exercise for everyone and leads to fuller understanding.

Emotional disagreements, with shouting and cursing, and failure to separate the opinion from the person expressing it are not useful learning experiences except insofar as you learn self-control and ways of dealing with a**holes.

I’m not sure your premise is correct. Many people learn thouroughly and quickly through pain and tribulation. Just sayin’.

@tinyfaery – I agree, I don’t think the premise is correct. The lessons I have learned most quickly in my life are those that had a not so positive ending if not done correctly.

I think great knowledge can come from an argument if you reflect upon it afterwards. Why did the discussion devolve? What could I have said differently to better support my case? Was I prepared? was my argument supported by facts I could prove? Was I speaking for myself or making assumptions about others…

I don’t think it’s clear that knowledge is acquired faster and better through positive experiences, and I don’t think that arguments are inherently negative. So I think the question itself is based on false premises.

That’s kind of a major flaw in our educational system that punishes those who do NOT know.