Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
long.
|
My point is that you spend significant time on what people 'ought' to talk about and what methods best prescribe to productive results.
Daily discussion amongst peers is rarely so commonly analysed on an academic level as it is on the internet.
Downplaying points like undercover's because you find them not productive doesn't fuel interesting conversation. Who cares if his point is productive? They're worth sharing and worth discussing. Motives ARE worth discussing and there is rarely such thing in philosophical and political discussion as "they're either right or they're wrong." I'm very interested in why people hold their views about refugees, and why they bring up certain points to justify their views.
Hopefully this does not lead to a proclamation of you 'blocking' me again
