Filter Coffee #033
On Valentine's Day & Debates, Discussions & Arguments
Dear readers,
🔗 FC #32 on Grandparents was well received and I received some very good comments and feedback. Thank you! Many of you fondly recalled the good time you had with your grandparents. Some of you, who have become grandparents, rued the fact that the grandchildren have grown up and your interactions have not been as intimate as they used to be. One reader made a very insightful comment. He said that he was so busy all the time that he hardly spent quality time with his son and daughter and by the time he retired, they were on to their respective career paths and now he absolutely loves the time that he is able to spend with his grandchildren. Another dear friend of mine has written to say that he is turning 80 and his children and grandchildren are busy planning a religious ritual and they are excited about it. Experiences are varied, from not feeling so happy to being delighted to be grandparents. Life is like that.
💕 Valentine’s Day: A day to celebrate love
According to history.com, the Catholic Church recognizes at least three saints named Valentine or Valentinus, all with a different backstory.
One legend contends that Valentine was a priest who served during the third century in Rome. When Emperor Claudius II decided that single men made better soldiers than those with wives and families, he outlawed marriage for young men. Valentine, realizing the injustice of the decree, defied Claudius and continued to perform marriages for young lovers in secret. When Valentine’s actions were discovered, Claudius ordered that he be put to death.
Other stories suggest that Valentine may have been killed for attempting to help Christians escape harsh Roman prisons, where they were often beaten and tortured. According to one legend, an imprisoned Valentine actually sent the first “valentine” greeting himself after he fell in love with a young girl—possibly his jailor’s daughter—who visited him during his confinement. Before his death, it is alleged that he wrote her a letter signed “From your Valentine,” an expression that is still in use today. Although the truth behind the Valentine legends is murky, the stories all emphasize his appeal as a sympathetic, heroic and — most importantly — romantic figure. Some people believe we celebrate Valentine's Day on February 14th to coincide with the anniversary of Saint Valentine's death or burial.
Valentine's Day celebrations did not catch on in India until around 1992. The holiday became popular thanks to programs on commercial TV channels, dedicated radio programs, and love letter competitions, in addition to an economic liberalization that allowed the explosion of the Valentine card industry. The celebration has caused a sharp change in how people have been displaying their affection in public since the Middle Ages. Conservatives of all kinds consider Valentine’s day a cultural contamination. Nevertheless, it is conservatively estimated that Valentine cards and gifts industry garners around 30 to 40 billion dollars world over.
Regardless of all of the above, the fact remains that Valentine’s day is all about celebrating love.
🗣 Discussion | Debate | Argument
I have always wondered as to how these three types of articulation differ from one another. The common denominator is that all three involve good articulation to be effective and all of them involve presentation of one’s own viewpoints on a particular topic or issue.
The interesting thing is that a discussion involves the presentation of different perspectives whereas debate and argument could involve differing opinions. If one were to try and distinguish debate from argument one could say that a debate is ‘for’ or ‘against’ a particular proposition whereas an argument is about asserting a view and defending it passionately.
Speaking of passion, debate lacks passion simply because it involves logic and reasoning and in sharp contrast, many arguments could be unreasonable and illogical.
Please see if you agree with what I have to say:
Discussion could be both multilateral and multipartite accommodating many individuals having different perspectives to offer on a particular issue.
Debate could be bilateral, which simply means the proponents and the opponents are treated equally and they are allowed to present their differing viewpoints. In other words, it represents bilateral symmetry.
Discussions do not normally involve competitiveness whereas a debate is expected to be competitive as it usually presents two opposing points of view.
An argument is about asserting one’s views disregarding a contra view or being intolerant about what another person may have to say on the same subject. It is bilateral or multilateral but is replete with asymmetry.
You can test all these propositions by playing out a given scenario. Let us look at a simulated family situation:
There is this joint family of say eight adults and four children. Two adults, husband and wife with two kids, decide to move out and set up their own home. A discussion ensues where an effort is made by the parents to dissuade them and wanting to understand what sparked the desire to separate. It transforms into a debate as to why it is a good idea to go nuclear versus why it is a bad idea. As if the topic of the debate was “A joint family is better than a nuclear family”. When the two opposing camps run out of good reasons to justify their respective positions, emotions creep in and the debate meanders into the realm of an argument, with passions running high. Sensibility and reasoning are substituted by emotional blackmail, stubbornness or illogic on both sides. The parting of ways becomes excruciatingly bitter.
A discussion morphing into a debate, which then morphs into an argument is a real possibility. If it involves decision making, you can find many who are good at questioning a decision and not offering their own. Even if one were to grudgingly accept a decision, that person would say “well, if you think it is right please go ahead but don’t say I did not warn you”.
Discussions and decision making are complementary processes. When you have a predisposition on how something has to be achieved it inhibits discussion. You cannot be seen as holding a discussion if the mind is already made up and the meeting is called for a mere endorsement.
A healthy debate may facilitate good decision making and may also promote collective responsibility. A sense of ownership is created among the team members. Good leaders encourage democratic decision making, but when certain options debated upon during discussions lead to irreconcilable arguments, the leader must assimilate all that was said and take an informed decision.
Opinions matter. Everyone has an opinion about everything even if the subject knowledge is shallow or superficial. A set of opinions on a particular matter sets off a discussion, and the stronger the opinion of some, the greater the possibility of that opinion being imposed on others. Informed decision making is about considering the consequences of going ahead with that decision rather than mere decision making. Discussion, debates and arguments, when encouraged interchangeably, can help understand the consequences of a decision, the risk factors involved and the collateral damages it can cause. This then helps the team to come up with a plan to mitigate them.
The efficacy of each category of articulation is dependent entirely on focus, brevity and clarity. Therefore, discussions or debates or arguments cannot go on ad nauseam (indefinitely). We Indians are considered to be argumentative and to me, it is not an entirely mistaken notion because when we discuss or debate something we somehow infuse some passion or emotion into it and make it appear like a long-winded argument.
You must have heard the famous saying, “There was more heat in the meeting room than light”. That’s what happens when passions run high and discussions turn argumentative.
The wife calls her mother and complains about the bitter argument she had with the husband and says, “I am coming over to live with you”. The mother says, “No, no, he must pay for what he has done to you, I am coming to live with you.”
Dear readers, no arguments, this is Valentine’s week. Enjoy and savour every moment with your loved ones. And as always, stay safe, stay healthy. Ciao.
Thanks Pras,
For clearly differentiating between discussions, debate and argument with your surgical skill as usual. However discussions many times tend to become an argumentative.
Why does this happen?
On grand parenting, a friend of mine actually put it rightly. Your own child came to you, when you were trying to make your career a success and you had little time to focus on the child, whereas your grandchild came to you when you are more or less well settled and you have the time to dot on them and make up for lost time. No argument or discussion, debate is needed on that one, at least to me.
That brings me to the main subject of FC 33. Yes, articulation is indeed important. I am sorry for getting into an area that’s best avoided but, while discussing the subject, I cannot but refer to what one sees these days on TV is just a way of establishing that might is right. While not getting political, I must say the guilt of the farce that these have turned out to falls on all sides. I just don’t want to elevate these goings on as a discussion or debate or even arguments because it’s everything that it should not be. While accepting your statement that a discussion could morph into a debate, and later into an argument, and your statement that everyone has opinions and about passions ruling the roost, the question I ask is why try and ram it down another’s throat.
Generally that’s the bane involved in these TV shows, where people representing different views are invited and they are expected to defend the organizational position or often enough, just prove that the other’s view is defective. Regardless of their personal views they try and parrot things to just to prove their organization as right or rather the other point wrong, often in the process not allowing the opposite view to get aired.
A cursory example I have is often seen on TV is when a leader of a political leader, who having just lost an election, proceeds to try and prove that they have actually won or done better than last time quoting vote share % or numbers etc. Their views are cast in stone depending on what suits them at that moment and they often try to justify their views with lame justifications. I don’t think it’s passions on display but just theatrics meant to get their view / or prevent the other view from getting across and in the process making holding of different views excruciatingly bitter.
When can we see something healthier as in the example you quote of a discussion/ debate "on joint family or nuclear family which is better?” It’s not just that we are argumentative by nature but just an example of the games that politicians play with us being just a pawn that can be sacrificed at the altar of the games that they play.