The other day I walked the Pineapple Track here in Dunedin. I was accompanied by a friend who is a resident at Abbey College as well. The trail (which is called pineapple track because people use to bring pineapples and eat while walking the steep hill) goes from the valley Dunedin city center is located in up the ridges of the hills surrounding it. Standing up on those hills you get an amazing view over Dunedin, the pacific as well as part of the Otago region. It was a very nice hike. Nevertheless, I will focus this post on something else. Namely dialectic argumentation.

My friend and I had this intriguing conversation about normative behavior and how we should all question our choices, values and viewpoints more often. I told him that what makes me most frustrated is not that people disagree with me or see the world in a different way, it’s the way you enter a discussion which is essential to me. If you state your opinion in the way of assuming that those around the table agree you don’t open up for discussion, in other words, you don’t really want a discussion but a climate where everyone agrees. Another way to distance me is when people enter the discussion with the single aim to “win” and not to humbly discuss an issue and take in other perspectives. When I had gone on about this my friend taught me the word dialectic, which I had never heard before. The dialectic method differ from a debate in the sense that the goal is not to state a winner who has all the knowledge about a certain issue, as in a debate. When using dialectic argumentation your goal is to come as close to the truth of the matter as possible by reasoning together. This needs acknowledging that either one you has the truth or knows everything. We all see things from different viewpoints and can value issues differently based on our experiences. The goal is the come up with well-reasoned and rational answers together based on arguments from different perspectives.

I obviously found this way of discussion very appealing. Not just because the humbleness which is incorporated in the concept but also because I believe in solving problems together and acknowledging the complexity of ethical issues. The world is not only the world I see and experience. In a debate you want to win, have it your way, get the votes and receive power etcetera. In a dialectic argumentation you want to find solutions and the most rational and well-reasoned arguments possible using all the possible knowledge, emotions and experiences in the room. That is how I would like to solve the problems of our future society.

We had a really nice hike and I enjoyed our conversation. This trip to New Zealand is continuing to bring me new insights and ponderings of life, with some beautiful creations of God joining me.