Legend has it that the kings of old used to resolve war by playing the game of chess instead of participating in battle. If only all conflict could be solved in such a nonviolent manner. Or can it?
Rational discourse is the means to resolve conflict in a nonviolent manner by talking it out. And this is the topic on which the philosophy club discussed in their Jan. 25 meeting and presentation.
“The violence on both sides of the 2016 presidential election suggests rational discourse is dead or dying in this country, and must be revived to avoid the possibility of further violence or civil war,” said philosophy club member, Asher Rose, during his presentation on the topic.
Rose wanted listeners to try to understand how and why rational discourse happens or fails to happen. And he argued that it is completely vital to maintaining peace in political matters.
“Rational discourse is not only desirable but necessary in order to maintain a functional democracy in the United States and avert the possibility, however slight at the moment, of a descent into civil war,” Rose said.
To uphold rational discourse, freedom of speech is required to be in place. Rose brought in the voices of philosophers Hobbes and Spinoza to back up this point. Hobbes argued that preventing censorship was the only way to prevent faction and civil war in a society, in for the freedom of speech to be effective.
Spinoza too advocates the importance of the freedom of speech but also points out that freedom of thought is an inalienable right as well. Rose agreed.
“Respect the sincerity of each other’s beliefs and a willingness to reach across partisan lines,” he said. “Attack arguments, not people. Your life and the survival of our democracy may depend on it.
After the Rose’s presentation, the table was opened up for discussion. Topics such as the anti-Trump rallies, the civil rights movement and the Dakota Pipeline protest were brought up as examples of when rational discourse failed.
The club debated on when protest and rioting becomes ineffective and what the solution could be when rational discourse does fail. Many ideas were welcomed and opinions brought forth. And ultimately, rational discourse occurred when differing thoughts clashed.
