Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse
And that's where you're wrong. Stating an opposing opinion isn't divisive. The fact that people have opposing opinions means they're already divided. How people interact with one another after the divide is established determines whether or not they can come to a compromise or instead become entrenched. If they show contempt and disrespect toward one another in their language and tone then things shut down.
I don't know why you'd assume people are unable to compromise simply because they have strong opinions. Compromise comes into play when making a decision, allowing people to work together to find a solution that's as good as you can all agree on. It doesn't mean that you consider the compromise to be better than your original proposal nor does it mean changing your opinion to conform to others'. But in our case none of that is relevant since we're not making any of these decisions. We're only sharing our opinions. So no, I'm no promoting divisiveness.
|
Maybe I misunderstood your post. Your rant about the "mushy middle ground" sounded like you were against compromise. i.e. mushy middle ground = compromise
So is your point that I should be saying "damn all the cyclists and pedestrians because I want to drive my car everywhere" - if I actually want there to be a more balanced environment - in order to counter the "ban all cars" side of things? I guess I'm confused.
Threaded Mode