Having been in plenty of debates over time, I have come to believe that in most cases, argumentation causes divergence, not convergence. While the goals is the latter, the result is the former.
So, is it a case that it is better to no argue, or is it a case that how you argue determines the trajectory of agreement?
So, is it a case that it is better to no argue, or is it a case that how you argue determines the trajectory of agreement?