If the FACTS are on our side we simply present those facts and allow the evidence to speak for itself.
However, if we are short on facts--what then?
More and more I detect a trend among those who publicly disagree: they simply DISMISS others without resorting to facts.
One's opponent in an opinion war is labeled as "unworthy" of being listened to. Dismissed, shunned, shut down and waved away!
The Watchtower Society does this, of course.
Apostate is a label. It is automatically attached to any person who questions their teachings. The words DISLOYAL are quickly brandished and "mentally defective".
"Satanic" is a biggy! "Proud" and "arrogant" quickly get unfurled on the flagpole, too.
Is this tactic rude and unsavory or just a really bad habit?
Certainly it is lazy.
What about our personal relationships in our family, our casual friends, our rivals or FELLOW BOARD members here on JWn?
Do we demonstrate being mentally lazy by resorting to dismissing others when they don't swarm all over us with agreement and high fives?
Do we divide the "audience" by resorting to the easy labels of politcs and religion?
Do we pounce in groups on other groups like street gangs having an old-fashioned rumble or turf war?
Shouldn't an opinion be offered with a humble self-awareness that UNLESS we are willing to be WRONG we aren't likely to be convinced by any proof from any quarter??
Where is personal humility these days on a scale of virtues?
Are there any VIRTUES even left which are promoted by society--any part of society?
I'm just thinking out loud here.
Feel free to jump in and have your say.
I won't automatically DISMISS you