I mean, is it just pride, or is there actual value to it?
In a criminal trial, the defendent gets the last word, one final chance to defend himself. Was it always set up like that?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
I was just thinking about my one and only debate tournament in high school, which caused me to flee in horror at the mechanations of it.
The assumption that the last word actually does have value rests on believing that what it may get you - a trophy, and so on - is worth the price you pay to have the last word.
In a trial, there's no doubt - freedom is worh it. In something like this place, is there any prize worth the price?
I guess I'm asking if the last word has net value.
posted
Well, from a practical standpoint, that which you've heard most recently you remember better....
Posts: 5879 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Having the last word feels like you couldn't have been argued with anymore, like you got your point across and they were made speechless.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
I mean, for all the arguments that have petered out, how many here have truly stopped posting because they were overwhelmed by someone's logic and brilliance?
I think if someone has let down their pride enough to be persuaded by an argument, then they are humble enough to say it. In which case, the last words are "I agree."
posted
Here's a last word from another thread, that I wanted to post but it got closed.
An oblivion of stupidity means that it's so stupid it'll be totally forgotten, so what's the point of deleting it anyway? Posts: 1423 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a phenomenon called susceptibility. It's a key component in folks who lack primary morality. (the ability to act ethically whatever those ethics happen to be.) Susceptible people who follow the last word can always be had back later.
The opposite of susceptible is autonomous. If one is totally autonomous, there is not much use in engaging in dialogue. And yet these are the people who will elevate the better quality argument over the louder one, or the one most recently heard.
Posts: 383 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jonny, I don't want to be specific. I'm trying to be general on purpose. There was a thread a while where someone asked if it was wrong to always need to have the final word.
Also, there was a thread on Nauvoo where someone came to agree with somebody who had a completely different opinion, and I was so incredibly impressed by the person saying that they did come to agree. So, I've been thinking about it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought "rive" meant to split someting open. I remember studying it in high school because some kid came up with a very strange sentence to illustrate. It involved controlled substances, by the way, not anything directly violent.
I hate having the last word because it usually means I've killed the thread. I check back in to see if anyone has replied to me.
I know in an argument it is hard to keep in that last word. If I don't say anything further, I just sit there and boil.
Posts: 383 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like discussions best that end with the people involved understanding how the other sees the world and agreeing to disagree. Too many arguments involve trying to break someone down, force them to change their paradigm. Such a dramatic change in thought does not happen lightly, certainly not as a result of an argument. And when they are being treated disrespectfully, they are a lot less likely to want to listen to you at all.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, the word should have been reviving. So I left off a few letters. I still believe that people who have only one way to spell a word lack imagination
Second, the last word has value mostly to people who love the sound of their own voice.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
