Agnostic.com

1 1

It's extremely frustrating when someone engages in a long debate about the existance of a socital problem, then refuses to offer ANY possible solutions. Why would someone debate in a thread on politics, with no motivation to back a specific political side or solution? What is the point? When a person does this, THAT PERSON is PART OF THE PROBLEM because they have offered ZERO solution.

Flowerwall 7 Jan 28
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

I couldn't disagree more.
If half the country doesn't agree there's a problem in the first place they will obstruct any and all solutions.
It takes almost no awareness at all to clearly see that wearing a mask is a public health safety precaution, not wearing one is a political statement.
If people won't accept the basic evidence of their eyes and live news coverage what do you think they'll do with your solutions.
We live in times where basic facts are controversial with a solid third of the population.

Okay, but you have taken a position. You advocate a side and solution. "Wear a mask". What if you spent a very long time debating the issue then when I said "So what is a solution you are expecting from government?" If you offer none, your silence is part of the problem. Because if someone read your opinion and then left with no solution, it's something you should have done. If you are well informed on the topic, an eductaed person, say someone who understands physics and time dilation, you should be expected to formulate some type of SOLUTION that helps others rather than offering ZERO. Why else would you talk, talk, talk?

@Flowerwall No, not always. When the hole in the Ozone was growing no one knew why, some very smart guys figured out how chlorine in CFCs was destroying the ozone, then they advised us.
First define the problem.
You can't propose a meaningful solution before you actually understand the problem.
That's why the Republicans were doomed to fail.
Solutions are and should always be rarer than problems.

@Willow_Wisp The problem was VERY CLEARLY defined by the debater. There was no lack of understanding. There was a self-assuredness that surpasses the best, brightest of leaders, yet NO SOLUTION OFFERED. The individual needs to spend much more time in solutions orientated avenues. Until that time I see the person as part of the problem, well in this one particular instance.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:572533
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.