Question

What is the difference between brainwashing and an argument?

What does it mean to dispute an argument on the basis of the facts?

What does it mean to dispute an argument on the basis of the values?

What does it mean to dispute an argument on the basis of the reasoning?

Answer 1

Brainwashing is the psychological manipulation of the listener to accept and follow the philosophy of the speaker. In this technique, the subject's ability to think critically and independently gets severely impacted by introduction of new unwanted and sensitive thoughts and ideas. Brainwashing usually leads to complete change of one's attitude, values and beliefs.

On the other hand, Argument are the claims backed by appropriate reasoning and are well supported by evidences. An argument usually involves more than two participants with every participants provided with equal opportunity to express and validate his/her thoughts, they need not reach a conclusion at the end of the argument. Through this technique, there is an openness of discussion between all parties and there is no permanent alteration of one's attitude, values and beliefs after the closure of argument.

Argument on the basis of facts basically involves stating actual facts and figures obtained through the various means of research. In this type of argumentation, only facts found to be in direct refutation of another participant's point are stated. These facts are open for contention and can be cross verified by anybody.

Argument on the basis of values usually involves using the generally perceived sentiments and ideology as the right way of doing a thing. This argument can neither be justified by facts nor be justified by evidences, but gets validated because of being a socially accepted norm. This type of argument usually takes place because of difference in values of the participants.

Argument on the basis of Reasoning involves interpretation of a fact by various participants. In this technique, the participants draw their own logic behind perceiving a fact and thus, different participant can have different interpretation from the same fact. Even though the facts could be cross-verified by the participants but the reasoning can neither be cross verified nor be validated by any body.

Please Like & Provide your reviews in comments. :-)