I am one of those people who firmly believes that arguing is useful. You never know. You might just convince someone. I mean, that hard core hippie down the block? He might buy an AK 47 for the explicit purpose of shooting nice fluffy squirrels by the time that you’re done with him. It could happen. Then again, the world could end in 2012 because a whole bunch of Mayans got tired of writing out their calendar at that point.
Anyway, as you all know, I am agnostic. This doesn’t mean that I couldn’t come to believe in God, if, say, a being came down from the sky and began vaporizing all objects in the immediate vicinity. That would be very conclusive proof. I would change my mind.
But of course, the death of any good argument is the phrase, “You will never convince me.”
Whether or not you agree with me on any particular issue, I’m sure that you’ve all run into this problem. The person that you want to beat with a stick for refusing to see the light, and who counters with the blank “no.” The person who will simply not acknowledge a contradiction even if it is staring him in the face, and worse, the person who contradicts himself. FYI guys, if you’re arguing, this is when you should give up. You’re only going to frustrate yourself by continuing.
Lawyers, in most cases, don’t have to deal with blatant contradictions. They have the luxury of being able to shove transcripts into faces if people are proving particularly reluctant to admit to their own words. But even this won’t deter the most obnoxiously stubborn of contradictors. Take Joran van der Sloot. He has claimed no involvement in the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, then calimed, on tape, that he sold Natalee Holloway into white slavery for $10,000 on a beach in Aruba, and is now claiming ignorance once again, saying that he lied about the white slavery bit.
If anyone still cares about Natalee Holloway, you can read the full story here http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,460108,00.html