|
The idealism of perfectly understood discourse is admirable.
The inherent limitations of language dictate it is not something which will ever be attained, and therefore to treat it as a great disappointment by denouncing discourse in general is misguided.
If you have an opinion you wish to express, by all means express it. If someone responds with what you consider to be a mischaracterization, it would be wise to either refrain from commenting all together or describing how your opinion differs from that perception of your opinion. To take the course of action that has been laid out in this thread - pointing out that someone else's perception of your opinion is incorrect without bothering to shed light on why it is incorrect - does no one any service.
A discussion can fulfill many needs. If you view it as a method of attaining an agreed upon outcome, more often than not you will be disappointed. If you view it as a means to seek alternate perspectives to your own for your own growth, it is a powerful tool - but only if you encourage it, not if you denounce it and hide behind your initial, apparently miscontrued, opinion.
That a course of action has been taken which intentionally limits discussion by effectively saying "you have your opinion and I have mine, that is all, but I will point out that you don't understand what my opinion is" while claiming that there is some higher purpose to this type of "discussion" is not only disingenous, but pure arrogance.
This thread has become an interesting discussion. A discussion which is not only fundamentally unrelated to the topic, but the inevitable outcome of any topic started by someone who intends to treat a discussion as an unwelcome intrusion into their opinion.
|