Sunday Is Fast Becoming “Rant Day”

And maybe that’s not such a bad thing. I know this blog is supposed to be about writing and language, but my opinions tend to jump out. Besides, I’d like to encourage arguing—as in debate, not fighting. I’ve written about how important effective, rational arguments are for a reason. If you’re going to say something, you should make sure there aren’t more holes in your rationale than in a sieve.

School. All of us have opinions on it, either as students, former students, or parents. There isn’t a lot of arguing about what a school should do for a student (i.e. teach them how to function as adults), so why do there seem to be so many problems with school systems? We have struggles with unions, debates over class sizes, and knock-down drag-out fights about budget. Why?

In a nutshell, it’s because reality encroaches on the idealistic version of school in our minds. We’d like small class sizes, fairly compensated and extremely competent teachers, and enough money for both of these. But the fact of the matter is that schools get a lot funding based on property taxes (at least where I live) and the wealthier communities will have more money to attract more/better educators, not to mention fund a variety of classes.

Property taxes aren’t their only source of funds, but they are enough to make a huge difference. And that is only one part of the harsh reality of education! There’s the turning away from creative classes, the focus on passing state tests, the ill-preparedness most graduates face when they apply for their first credit card.

Any others? Sadly, I don’t think it’s too difficult to come up with them.

I know this was a long post, so I hope you just scrolled to the bottom to get this important message. Contest. Go now.

Arguing Effectively Requires Passion, Not Bias

What do I mean? you ask. What brought this on?

Letters to the editor. Not entirely—I’ve read blog posts that have irked me and seen stuff on television. They try so hard to convince me of something and fail completely because of faulty sources, loaded wording, and obvious bias. Unfortunately, appealing to someone’s emotions (especially fear) can overwhelm their judgment enough to convince them, which is why He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named-At-Least-Not-On-This-Blog has legions of followers. 

But it’s not effective arguing.

Effective arguing—where you actually prove a point—requires sources (real sources), restraint and—what’s it called?—objectivity. If someone acts disdainful of the medical community and then lists a hundred papers confirming vaccines cause autism, I’m going to think they chose an answer they liked and found the sources to back it up. Even more so if they disparage anything that contradicts what they claim. In all fairness, I’d like to say that there are plenty of people saying vaccines don’t cause autism who do the same thing. Guess what? If they can’t do it, neither can you. Use facts to back up your claim, not dismissing others. If you’re really right, it shouldn’t be that hard.

Now for restraint. This is just because I’ve found people are less likely to listen to you if you start yelling at how they are ruining the country/killing millions through ignorance/I don’t know what. I know. It’s crazy. People don’t like being insulted.

My culminating thought is this: be careful what you take as truth and don’t believe anything because you like the way it sounds. And if you want to argue effectively (i.e. so your argument isn’t full of more holes than a sieve), do it calmly, listen to others, and cite you’re sources.