Arguments Are Algebra
Thinking and feeling and knowing aren't all the same thing
![“[Students] should not be fed the false promise that by not learning certain core content in high school, that you will still have all options open in college,” says Brian Conrad, a math professor at Stanford University.](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fa7a4ed64-7bf2-4451-9856-3baf97046151_1460x820.webp "“[Students] should not be fed the false promise that by not learning certain core content in high school, that you will still have all options open in college,” says Brian Conrad, a math professor at Stanford University.")
We can mean many different things when we speak of arguments. Are we talking about bickering with a boss, bureaucrat, coworker, cashier? Are we talking about romantic partners yelling and crying? Are we talking about a particular line of thinking that supports some view? Or a line of thinking that decisively proves some view is true?
When an argument1 supports something we already believe2 we will tend to like that argument. Since it serves what we already think and feel the argument is likely to seem strong. We’ll tend to think it proves or at least supports what it points toward.
But it might not. Sometimes it actually does nothing to support its conclusion, even if the conclusion is in fact true. I explained this to a friend yesterday:
Here’s that 30 seconds, giving an absurd argument for a true conclusion:
Then came this:
Then a bit about the many problems in the inferential dumpster fire3 below concerning Gaza:
Thanks for your interest friends and enemies and internet strangers.
Meaning an argument in the sense of a line of thinking rather than an interpersonal event.
Or supports something that fits well with the things we already believe.
Am I being unfair? Am I expecting too much? I don’t think so: