Something that annoys me from time to time in Great Debates is when I see one poster (A) gleefully pointing out that some other poster (B) has contradicted a position which he (B) espoused in some other thread. Or else (A) will attack (B) on the grounds that (B) has behaved unreasonably or irrationally in a previous thread.
My argument is that each thread in Great Debates should be treated as a separate entity and the participants in said thread should not be held accountable for their positions or behavior in previous threads.
Arguments in Favor….
1…I believe that a poster has the right, if he so desires, to participate in a debate and present arguments solely for the pleasure of debating. This means that he has the right to argue that chocolate covered boobies are Gods gift to mankind this week and then turn around and argue that chocolate covered boobies are tools of the devil next week. Demanding consistency between threads has the effect of negating this right.
2…I believe that posters have the right to change their minds and their opinions.
3….Appeal to other threads is irrelevant. If poster (B) has presented a strong argument that chocolate covered boobies are tools of the devil and supported this argument with a reasonable chain of evidence, then pointing out that he has, in another thread, argued in favor of chocolate covered boobies only serves to raise questions about (B)s consistency. It in no way weakens his argument or challenges his evidence.
4….Allowing each thread to stand on its own would reduce the number of “…he hit me first…” and “….Oh yeah, well you did it too….” posts, of which we are almost all occasionally guilty, but which don’t serve any useful purpose in advancing the debate.
5……Appeal to other threads makes life hard on all of the other posters who are simply trying to follow the debate. Every time poster (A) claims that poster (B) has somehow contradicted himself or alleges that poster (B) is guilty of misbehavior in another thread, each reader has to decide whether to simply accept Poster (A)s word on the subject or to actually read the other thread in order to see if poster (A) has, perhaps, misrepresented the situation. Since these “other threads” are sometimes multiple pages and are likely to be filled with appeals to other “other threads” which are then filled with appeals themselves, the process of checking can be draining.
Arguments Against……