-- R.G. Menzies
LIBERTARIAN/CONSERVATIVE DIGEST AND COMMENTARY FROM AN ACADEMIC PSYCHOLOGIST in Brisbane, Australia. My academic publications are widely read
Click on the title of any post to bring up the sidebar
How to Have a Useful Conversation About Climate Change in 11 Steps
There is an article under the title above here. It is aimed at convincing people about the danger of anthropogenic global warming. So is it from some high-powered Warmist source? No. Rather curiously, it is by a professor at a Tibetan Buddhist college located in Portland, Oregon.
Even more curiously, it actually says nothing about global warming. It is a manual telling how to persuade anybody of anything. And it is a pretty good one. The steps outlined make sense in any discussion of a sensitive topic.
So for once I see nothing to criticize in it
COMMENT FROM A READER:
I read the article. It is a focus on a method of persuasion. It was not a method of finding the truth. The person seeking to discuss the issue with another goes about it with the assumption that he is right and the only objective is to change the mind of the other. Interesting that no where does the exercise promote the idea of seeking the truth through an exchange of ideas, scientific information and observation. It will not work on a neighbor while helping him clear his drive of 12 inches of snow in mid April.
The exchange may work on a closed mind if true facts are the basis of the discussion. The exchange will easily fix the opinion of someone that enters the discussion with no opinion and any logical set of information is used to make the persuasion. I see it as a trick to be used on indifferent, unsuspecting, persuadable individuals. The method is a one on one approach and will not work as group therapy. One on One will be an extremely slow message unless you can also convince the audience of one to now also spread the gospel.
By JR on Sunday, April 21, 2019
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment
All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them