But that cuts both ways: two skilled rhetoriticians in debate each won't permit the other to deploy a logical fallacy. Therefore they will always converge on the truth.
Been thinking about this all day. I didn't want to flippantly disagree, but there was something about your comment that bugged me.
I think maybe you have overstated. I would phrase it this way: skilled rhetoriticians _tend_ to converge on a semantic definition around the meaning of words and phrases.
I don't think they come to any ultimate truth, no matter what the greeks thought. I think what happens in any productive conversation is something more along the lines of shared mental model alignment, which I would argue is vastly more important.
Thanks for giving me something to cogitate on yesterday!
Been thinking about this all day. I didn't want to flippantly disagree, but there was something about your comment that bugged me.
I think maybe you have overstated. I would phrase it this way: skilled rhetoriticians _tend_ to converge on a semantic definition around the meaning of words and phrases.
I don't think they come to any ultimate truth, no matter what the greeks thought. I think what happens in any productive conversation is something more along the lines of shared mental model alignment, which I would argue is vastly more important.
Thanks for giving me something to cogitate on yesterday!