summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/devils-advocate.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/devils-advocate.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/devils-advocate.html152
1 files changed, 152 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/devils-advocate.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/devils-advocate.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dfd5482
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/devils-advocate.html
@@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<title>Devil's Advocate
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+ <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/devils-advocate.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Why the Devil's Advocate Doesn't Help Reach the Truth</h2>
+
+<p>by Richard Stallman</p>
+
+<p>Playing the devil's advocate means challenging a position by saying
+what a hypothetical adversary would say. I encounter this frequently
+in interviews and Q&amp;A sessions, and many people believe that this
+is a good way to put a controversial position to the test. What it
+really does is put the controversial position at a disadvantage.</p>
+
+<p>There is an indirect way of playing the devil's advocate: to say,
+&ldquo;If I defended your position, how should I respond if someone said
+XYZ?&rdquo; This is less unfriendly than the ordinary devil's advocate,
+who would simply say XYZ, but has the same effect.</p>
+
+<p>Cunning adversaries try intentionally to obstruct thoughtful
+consideration of a position they oppose. My cunning and unscrupulous
+adversary (the &ldquo;devil,&rdquo; let us say) would not want my views
+to get a proper hearing, especially if the devil thinks they are valid
+and people might agree with them. The best way to prevent that is to
+block me from making them understood.</p>
+
+<p>The devil achieves that by twisting my words: presenting a misleading
+context in which my words appear to mean something other than what I
+intended. If this succeeds, it will confuse the audience and distract
+them from the issue, in effect preventing it from being properly raised.
+If this makes my words appear to mean something that the audience will
+condemn, and which nobody present is really in favor of, I may need a
+long explanation to get back on track. There may not be time for
+this, or the audience might lose focus.</p>
+
+<p>If I succeed in overcoming the first misunderstanding, the cunning
+adversary would spring another, and another. If the adversary is
+better at verbal fencing than I am, I might never get my point across.
+If the stress makes me heated and I have trouble speaking clearly, the
+adversary will count that a success. It matters little to the devil
+whether it is my position that is vanquished or only me personally, as
+long as the audience rejects my views.</p>
+
+<p>If you are not a real &ldquo;devil,&rdquo; only playing the devil's
+advocate, you would not really wish to prevent me from presenting the
+intended point. But you may prevent it without intending to. Playing
+the devil's advocate means you act hostile even though you don't feel
+hostility. Once you decide to say what an adversary would say, you
+are likely to do the job as well as you can, by imitating the toughest
+adversary you can imagine: the cunning and unscrupulous one, whose
+goal is to oppose rather than to get at the truth.</p>
+
+<p>If you know what such adversaries have said to me, or if you are
+skilled at imagining them, you would say the same things they do.
+These statements could distract the audience and block consideration
+of the issue, just as if a real adversary had said them. But if you
+are not really my adversary, that result may not be what you really
+want. If your goal was to shed light on the issue, your approach will
+have backfired.</p>
+
+<p>What I say on many issues goes against the establishment position, and
+I don't expect people to agree with me without considering the issue
+thoroughly, including the counterarguments. Indeed, it would be
+almost impossible for anyone to avoid considering the establishment's
+arguments, since everyone knows them by heart. To judge what is right
+requires getting to the bottom of the issue.</p>
+
+<p>The kind of questions that help get to the bottom of an issue are not
+those that a cunning and unscrupulous adversary would pose, but rather
+those of a thoughtful person who has not made up per mind (<a href="#ft1">1</a>). They
+are questions that prise apart the aspects of the issue, so one can see
+the various possible positions on each aspect, what they imply, and
+how they relate. Very different from playing devil's advocate.</p>
+
+<p>Thus, instead of trying to play the devil's advocate, I suggest
+that you adopt the goal of &ldquo;probing the issues.&rdquo; And if
+you are asked how you would answer if someone else asked a hostile
+question, perhaps this essay is a good response.</p>
+
+<hr class="thin" />
+<h3 style="font-size:1.2em">Footnote</h3>
+<ol>
+ <li id="ft1">The author uses the gender-neutral third person singular
+pronouns &ldquo;person,&rdquo; &ldquo;per,&rdquo; and
+&ldquo;pers.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+ replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+ We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+ translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+ Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+ to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
+ &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+ <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+ our web pages, see <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+ files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+ be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this
+ without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+ Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+ document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+ document was modified, or published.
+
+ If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+ Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+ years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+ year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+ being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+
+ There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+ Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+<p>Copyright &copy; 2012, 2017 Richard Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2017/11/07 21:09:49 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>