ifs and buts are seen as essential to rational debate*.
by whom?
The rationale is in the concrete, not the if.
As soon as you bring ifs and buts into an argument, you raise doubt, and it is no longer watertight.
What if so and so, well what if NOT so and so.
That is not rational debate.
I’m sure you can word your points in a more concrete way, and avoid the ifs and buts. But by doing so, a concrete argument is easier to rip apart and challenge, than a flimsy point built on a few ifs, buts and maybes.
1 member liked this post.