TexasCHLforum.com

Arguing with someone who has strongly ingrained beliefs on any topic is just not worth the time and effort to try and convince them otherwise. I would have just left the guy holding onto his own opinions and left it at that.

"You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away and know when to run." - Don Schlitz -

MrsFosforos wrote:Arguing with someone who has strongly ingrained beliefs on any topic are just not worth the time and effort to try and convince them otherwise.

I agree that you won't change the person's mind. However, depending upon the context, you may affect the opinion of a bystander who is listening.

- Jim

Here's the thing about talking to Idealists:
You won't change their mind. But don't give up.

You can always try and make your position known and understood. In a lot of ways, this can be better than trying to "convert" someone, as they'll learn that you're not some kind of nut.

People also tend to shut down as soon as you start attacking their beliefs, so focusing on yours is a good backdoor.

seamusTX wrote:

MrsFosforos wrote:Arguing with someone who has strongly ingrained beliefs on any topic are just not worth the time and effort to try and convince them otherwise.

I agree that you won't change the person's mind. However, depending upon the context, you may affect the opinion of a bystander who is listening.

- Jim

Very true. Hadn't mentioned this, but thursday was the last day of class for our school, and as an extra credit assignment in my Business Law class, we were told to research the castle doctrine and apply it to the Pasadena shooting case (Joe Horn vs. the two deceased burglars).

Once our discussion began, the teacher immediately began making all kinds of false statements (such as, you're allowed to use force to protect yourself, but only at night, etc.). I contradicted her on that one but she didn't seem believing. Luckily as part of my proof for the extra credit deal, I'd printed Penal Code Sections 9.31-9.33 and 9.41-9.43, and SB378 as it was adopted. So I walked up front and showed her that, and she quietly moved to a new topic. She later made another comment about all guns in texas having to be registered, etc... apparently this one other young guy that sits behind me in class is very pro gun(his exact words were "I'm a member of a lot of gun organizations and don't think the state has any business in my gun cabinet") and well read on his defense laws, and called her out on that one. It went that way for the rest of class, us calling her back and forth on her mistakes and way of thinking, while the rest of the class seemed mostly indifferent.

At any rate, several people in class brought up other bad points (such as, you can now buy anything, including full auto weapons, since the AWB ban expired not long ago) that we WERE able to correctly inform some people on.

In the end, the teacher simply said "well, it's obvious you two are far more read on your gun laws than I am" which was pretty sweet, given her know-it-all attitude on everything all semester. But her opinion didn't change.

We were however able to definitely spread some seeds in the minds of our peers. One of them who originally was on the side that Mr. Horn was in the wrong, eventually even said "well, you gotta at least think he was a pretty good neighbor, because he risked his life to cover his neighbor's property without even knowing the neighbor."

And that's the moral of my story :)

In the end, the teacher simply said "well, it's obvious you two are far more read on your gun laws than I am" which was pretty sweet, given her know-it-all attitude on everything all semester. But her opinion didn't change.

What a shame.

In my day, the "Teacher/Professor" was required to know what they were talking about.....before doing so.

Sounds like she'd make an excellent reporter however.

What a hillary. Wonder who he plans to vote for?

well done on killing some of that misinformation so many liberally professors spew on our youth. Sadly, my wife and I both had to endure democrat professors aiming to brainwash their students.

waltherone wrote:

seamusTX wrote:

MrsFosforos wrote:Arguing with someone who has strongly ingrained beliefs on any topic are just not worth the time and effort to try and convince them otherwise.

I agree that you won't change the person's mind. However, depending upon the context, you may affect the opinion of a bystander who is listening.

- Jim

Very true. Hadn't mentioned this, but thursday was the last day of class for our school, and as an extra credit assignment in my Business Law class, we were told to research the castle doctrine and apply it to the Pasadena shooting case (Joe Horn vs. the two deceased burglars).

Once our discussion began, the teacher immediately began making all kinds of false statements (such as, you're allowed to use force to protect yourself, but only at night, etc.). I contradicted her on that one but she didn't seem believing. Luckily as part of my proof for the extra credit deal, I'd printed Penal Code Sections 9.31-9.33 and 9.41-9.43, and SB378 as it was adopted. So I walked up front and showed her that, and she quietly moved to a new topic. She later made another comment about all guns in texas having to be registered, etc... apparently this one other young guy that sits behind me in class is very pro gun(his exact words were "I'm a member of a lot of gun organizations and don't think the state has any business in my gun cabinet") and well read on his defense laws, and called her out on that one. It went that way for the rest of class, us calling her back and forth on her mistakes and way of thinking, while the rest of the class seemed mostly indifferent.

At any rate, several people in class brought up other bad points (such as, you can now buy anything, including full auto weapons, since the AWB ban expired not long ago) that we WERE able to correctly inform some people on.

In the end, the teacher simply said "well, it's obvious you two are far more read on your gun laws than I am" which was pretty sweet, given her know-it-all attitude on everything all semester. But her opinion didn't change.

We were however able to definitely spread some seeds in the minds of our peers. One of them who originally was on the side that Mr. Horn was in the wrong, eventually even said "well, you gotta at least think he was a pretty good neighbor, because he risked his life to cover his neighbor's property without even knowing the neighbor."

And that's the moral of my story :)

I noticed you are from Huntsville. Was this person at the party from Huntsville? I wonder what their view would have been, if they had been the individual who was hijacked by the two escaped inmates a couple of months ago?

I was getting a tire changed at the Tire Max the day those inmates escaped. I must have left five minutes before they came through that area.

flintknapper wrote:
Sounds like she'd make an excellent reporter however.

She used to be an environmental lawyer

Russell:

That person played you like a fiddle!

As soon as you realize you are conversing with a person like this, it is best to bid them a nice day and move on. They have no intention of sincerely listening and will only use their "success" at the end of the discussion to reinforce their faulty ideas.

It's very similar to having a conversation with a paranoid schizophrenic.

Wildscar wrote:

Russell wrote: - God is the only one who should be the ultimate authority on death.
I will eave this god question alone. I'm not going to start a holy war with my answer.

I will :). While I could comment on the other points, this one bothers me the most. I am a Pagan-Buddhist, so my god is myself, but I do not judge others on my own religious convictions. I will defend my home with whatever means neccesary (I only own one gun, but many many swords... still training myself so I DON'T take a sword to a gun fight).

Read a book called "On Killing." You will understand why he thinks this way.

Majority of the people - human rather bury their heads in sand than face the gruesome reality.

Majority of the people - human rather die than kill - that includes even you and me because until the day we do it, hope that day will never come, we wouldn't know if we can do it or not.

Even you make them face the reality, they would choose not to believe that there are human who prey on other human. They would just choose the non-human object as the one to be blamed.